Estimation and Inference for the Mediation Proportion

Nevo Daniel (), Liao Xiaomei () and Spiegelman Donna ()
Additional contact information
Nevo Daniel: Departments of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Harvard University T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA
Liao Xiaomei: Departments of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Harvard University T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA; Currently employed at AbbVie Inc. North Chicago 60064, Illinois, USA
Spiegelman Donna: Departments of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Nutrition and Global Health, Harvard University T H Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA

The International Journal of Biostatistics, 2017, vol. 13, issue 2, 18

Abstract: In epidemiology, public health and social science, mediation analysis is often undertaken to investigate the extent to which the effect of a risk factor on an outcome of interest is mediated by other covariates. A pivotal quantity of interest in such an analysis is the mediation proportion. A common method for estimating it, termed the “difference method”, compares estimates from models with and without the hypothesized mediator. However, rigorous methodology for estimation and statistical inference for this quantity has not previously been available. We formulated the problem for the Cox model and generalized linear models, and utilize a data duplication algorithm together with a generalized estimation equations approach for estimating the mediation proportion and its variance. We further considered the assumption that the same link function hold for the marginal and conditional models, a property which we term “g-linkability”. We show that our approach is valid whenever g-linkability holds, exactly or approximately, and present results from an extensive simulation study to explore finite sample properties. The methodology is illustrated by an analysis of pre-menopausal breast cancer incidence in the Nurses’ Health Study. User-friendly publicly available software implementing those methods can be downloaded from the last author’s website (SAS) or from CRAN (R).

Keywords: mediation proportion; mediation analysis; the difference method; proportion of treatment effect (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2017-0006 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:13:y:2017:i:2:p:18:n:6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/ijb/html

DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2017-0006

Access Statistics for this article

The International Journal of Biostatistics is currently edited by Antoine Chambaz, Alan E. Hubbard and Mark J. van der Laan

More articles in The International Journal of Biostatistics from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().