Effect Measure Modification by Covariates in Mediation: Extending Regression-based Causal Mediation Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing methods for regression-based mediation analysis assume that the exposure-mediator effect, exposure-outcome effect, and mediator-outcome effect are constant across levels of the baseline characteristics of patients. However, investigators often have insight into how these underlying effects may be modified by baseline characteristics and are interested in how the resulting mediation effects, such as the natural direct effect (NDE), the natural indirect effect. (NIE), and the proportion mediated, are modified by these baseline characteristics. Motivated by an empirical example of anti-interleukin-1 therapy's benefit on incident anemia reduction and its mediation by an early change in an inflammatory biomarker, we extended the closed-form regression-based causal mediation analysis with effect measure modification (EMM). Using a simulated numerical example, we demonstrated that naive analysis without considering EMM can give biased estimates of NDE and NIE and visually illustrated how baseline characteristics affect the presence and magnitude of EMM of NDE and NIE. We then applied the extended method to the empirical example informed by pathophysiologic insights into potential EMM by age, diabetes, and baseline inflammation. We found that the proportion modified through the early post-treatment inflammatory biomarker was greater for younger, nondiabetic patients with lower baseline level of inflammation, suggesting differential usefulness of the early post-treatment inflammatory biomarker in monitoring patients depending on baseline characteristics. To facilitate the adoption of EMM considerations in causal mediation analysis by the wider clinical and epidemiologic research communities, we developed a free- and open-source R package, regmedint.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.120 | 0.277 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".