title: Statistical grand rounds: understanding the mechanism: mediation analysis in randomized and nonrandomized studies.
abstract: In comparative clinical studies, a common goal is to assess whether an exposure, or intervention, affects the outcome of interest. However, just as important is to understand the mechanism(s) for how the intervention affects outcome. For example, if preoperative anemia was shown to increase the risk of postoperative complications by 15%, it would be important to quantify how much of that effect was due to patients receiving intraoperative transfusions. Mediation analysis attempts to quantify how much, if any, of the effect of an intervention on outcome goes though prespecified mediator, or "mechanism" variable(s), that is, variables sitting on the causal pathway between exposure and outcome. Effects of an exposure on outcome can thus be divided into direct and indirect, or mediated, effects. Mediation is claimed when 2 conditions are true: the exposure affects the mediator and the mediator (adjusting for the exposure) affects the outcome. Understanding how an intervention affects outcome can validate or invalidate one's original hypothesis and also facilitate further research to modify the responsible factors, and thus improve patient outcome. We discuss the proper design and analysis of studies investigating mediation, including the importance of distinguishing mediator variables from confounding variables, the challenge of identifying potential mediators when the exposure is chronic versus acute, and the requirements for claiming mediation. Simple designs are considered, as well as those containing multiple mediators, multiple outcomes, and mixed data types. Methods are illustrated with data collected by the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) and utilized in a companion paper which assessed the effects of preoperative anemic status on postoperative outcomes.
authors.affiliation: From the Departments of Quantitative Health Sciences and Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
authors.forename: Edward J
authors.initials: EJ
authors.lastname: Mascha
authors.forename: Jarrod E
authors.initials: JE
authors.lastname: Dalton
authors.forename: Andrea
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kurz
authors.forename: Leif
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Saager
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D017008:Negotiating / Q000379:methods*; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D056164:Teaching Rounds / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*
references.citation: Shrout PE, Bolger N. Mediation in Experimental and Nonexperimental Studies. Psychol Methods. 2002;7:422–45
references.citation: Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41–55
references.citation: Imai K, Dyk DAV. Causal Inference with General Treatment Regimes: Generalizing the Propensity Score. J Am Stat Assoc. 2004;99:854–66
references.citation: Ming K, Rosenbaum PR. Substantial gains in bias reduction from matching with a variable number of controls. Biometrics. 2000;56:118–24
references.citation: Schwartz S, Li F, Reiter JP. Sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in principal stratification settings with binary variables. Stat Med. 2012;31:949–62
references.citation: Turan A, Mascha EJ, Roberman D, Turner PL, You J, Kurz A, Sessler DI, Saager L. Smoking and perioperative outcomes. Anesthesiology. 2011;114:837–46
references.citation: Abdelmalak B, Maheshwari A, Mascha E, Srivastava S, Marks T, Tang WW, Kurz A, Sessler DI. Design and Organization of the Dexamethasone, Light Anesthesia and Tight Glucose Control (DeLiT) Trial: a factorial trial evaluating the effects of corticosteroids, glucose control, and depth-of-anesthesia on perioperative inflammation and morbidity from major non-cardiac surgery. BMC Anesthesiol. 2010;10:11
references.citation: VanderWeele TJ. Mediation and mechanism. Eur J Epidemiol. 2009;24:217–24
references.citation: Albert JM, Nelson S. Generalized causal mediation analysis. Biometrics. 2011;67:1028–38
references.citation: Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J Educational Psychol. 1974;66:688–701
references.citation: Rubin DB. Direct and indirect causal effects via potential outcomes. Scand J Stat. 2004;31:161–70
references.citation: Robins JM, Hernán MA, Brumback B. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology. 2000;11:550–60
references.citation: Albert JM. Mediation analysis via potential outcomes models. Stat Med. 2008;27:1282–304
references.citation: Sobel ME. Direct and Indirect Effects in Linear Structural Equation Models. Sociol Methods Res. 1987;16:155–76
references.citation: Collins L, Graham J, Flaherty B. An alternative framework for defining mediation. Multivariate Behav Res. 1998;33:295–312
references.citation: Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51:1173–82
references.citation: Vanderweele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172:1339–48
references.citation: Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40:879–91
references.citation: Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D. A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol Methods. 2010;15:309–34
references.citation: Vittinghoff E, Sen S, McCulloch CE. Sample size calculations for evaluating mediation. Stat Med. 2009;28:541–57
references.citation: Preacher KJ, Kelley K. Effect size measures for mediation models: quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychol Methods. 2011;16:93–115
references.citation: Lin DY, Psaty BM, Kronmal RA. Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies. Biometrics. 1998;54:948–63
references.citation: Brumback BA, Hernán MA, Haneuse SJ, Robins JM. Sensitivity analyses for unmeasured confounding assuming a marginal structural model for repeated measures. Stat Med. 2004;23:749–67
references.citation: Muller D, Judd CM, Yzerbyt VY. When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005;89:852–63
references.citation: Morgan-Lopez AA, MacKinnon DP. Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation. Behav Res Methods. 2006;38:77–87
references.citation: Winship C, Mare RD. Structural Equations and Path Analysis for Discrete Data. The Am J Sociol. 1983;89:54–110