Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39958808›Full record

ArticleHealth services & outcomes research methodology2025

Practical challenges in mediation analysis: a guide for applied researchers.

Megan S Schuler, Donna L Coffman, Elizabeth A Stuart, Trang Q Nguyen, Brian Vegetabile, Daniel F McCaffrey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services & outcomes research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Psychometric properties of a direct violence scale and its behavioral mediation].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026
    Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Megan S SchulerRAND Corporation, Arlington, VA USA.
Donna L CoffmanDepartment of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC USA.
Elizabeth A StuartDepartment of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD USA.
Trang Q NguyenDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD USA.
Brian VegetabileRAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA USA.
Daniel F McCaffreyETS, Princeton, NJ USA.

Funding

Optimal Methods for Estimating Policy Effect Heterogeneity in Opioid Policy ResearchP50DA046351 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI Rosanna Smart · 2018 to 2026
$20.8M
Causal mediation methods for studying mechanisms in mental healthR01MH115487 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI STUART, ELIZABETH A. · 2018 to 2021
$1.3M
Improving TWANG as a Research Tool for Addiction ResearchersR01DA034065 · NIDA · RAND CORPORATION · PI GRIFFIN, BETH ANN, MCCAFFREY, DANIEL F · 2013 to 2015
$953k
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA046351NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA034065NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH115487
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mediation analysis is a statistical approach that can provide insights regarding the intermediary processes by which an intervention or exposure affects a given outcome. Mediation analyses rose to prominence, particularly in social science research, with the publication of Baron and Kenny's seminal paper and is now commonly applied in many research disciplines, including health services research. Despite the growth in popularity, applied researchers may still encounter challenges in terms of conducting mediation analyses in practice. In this paper, we provide an overview of conceptual and methodological challenges that researchers face when conducting mediation analyses. Specifically, we discuss the following key challenges: (1) Conceptually differentiating mediators from other "third variables," (2) Extending beyond the single mediator context, (3) Identifying appropriate datasets in which measurement and temporal ordering support the hypothesized mediation model, (4) Selecting mediation effects that reflect the scientific question of interest, (5) Assessing the validity of underlying assumptions of no omitted confounders, (6) Addressing measurement error regarding the mediator, and (7) Clearly reporting results from mediation analyses. We discuss each challenge and highlight ways in which the applied researcher can approach these challenges.

Indexed as

Causal inferenceMeasurement errorMediationMultiple mediatorsSensitivity analysis

Identifiers

PMID39958808
PMCPMC11821701

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.