ArticleFundamental research2025
Quantifying direct associations between variables.
Article in Fundamental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Correctly quantifying the direct association between variables based on observed data is a valuable topic to study. On the one hand, many traditional methods can only measure the linear direct association. On the other hand, certain existing measures of direct association between two variables suffer an instability problem when a parent variable has a strong influence on both variables. To solve these issues, we propose a measure, namely the independent conditional mutual information (ICMI), to quantify the direct association between two variables in a three-variable network. Additionally, we use simulation data to numerically compare the stability and reliability of the ICMI with those of other measures of direct association under different conditions. The numerical results show that ICMI performs more stably in many cases than the known measures such as unique information, conditional mutual information, and partial correlation. The statistical power results show that ICMI is more reliable for different forms of function. We further use our measure to analyze a network consisting of family finance, social security, and the residence of senior citizens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.