Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35711168›Full record

ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2022

Methods of analysis for survival outcomes with time-updated mediators, with application to longitudinal disease registry data.

Kamaryn T Tanner, Linda D Sharples, Rhian M Daniel, Ruth H Keogh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kamaryn T TannerDepartment of Medical Statistics, 4906London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6613-7833
Linda D SharplesDepartment of Medical Statistics, 4906London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0894-966X
Rhian M DanielDivision of Population Medicine, 2112Cardiff University, UK.
Ruth H KeoghDepartment of Medical Statistics, 4906London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S017968/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 107617/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mediation analysis is a useful tool to illuminate the mechanisms through which an exposure affects an outcome but statistical challenges exist with time-to-event outcomes and longitudinal observational data. Natural direct and indirect effects cannot be identified when there are exposure-induced confounders of the mediator-outcome relationship. Previous measurements of a repeatedly-measured mediator may themselves confound the relationship between the mediator and the outcome. To overcome these obstacles, two recent methods have been proposed, one based on path-specific effects and one based on an additive hazards model and the concept of exposure splitting. We investigate these techniques, focusing on their application to observational datasets. We apply both methods to an analysis of the UK Cystic Fibrosis Registry dataset to identify how much of the relationship between onset of cystic fibrosis-related diabetes and subsequent survival acts through pulmonary function. Statistical properties of the methods are investigated using simulation. Both methods produce unbiased estimates of indirect and direct effects in scenarios consistent with their stated assumptions but, if the data are measured infrequently, estimates may be biased. Findings are used to highlight considerations in the interpretation of the observational data analysis.

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisComputer SimulationHumansMediation AnalysisModels, StatisticalProportional Hazards ModelsRegistrieslongitudinal dataMediationsimulation studysurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID35711168
PMCPMC9523823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.