Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Sep 15;176(6):555-61.
doi: 10.1093/aje/kws131. Epub 2012 Aug 28.

Analytic results on the bias due to nondifferential misclassification of a binary mediator

Elizabeth L Ogburn  1 , Tyler J VanderWeele
Affiliations

Analytic results on the bias due to nondifferential misclassification of a binary mediator

Elizabeth L Ogburn et al. Am J Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Consider a study in which the effect of a binary exposure on an outcome operates partly through a binary mediator but measurement of the mediator is nondifferentially misclassified. Suppose that an investigator wishes to estimate the direct and indirect effects of the exposure on the outcome. In this paper, the authors describe a mathematical correspondence between the empirical expressions for the natural direct effect and the effect of exposure among the unexposed standardized by a binary confounder. They then exploit this correspondence to prove that the direction of the bias due to nondifferential measurement error in estimating the natural direct and indirect effects is to overestimate the natural direct effect and underestimate the natural indirect effect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Relations among a binary exposure A, an outcome Y, and a binary mediator M. M′ is a nondifferentially misclassified measure of M.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The effect of a binary exposure A on an outcome Y, confounded by C. C′ is a nondifferentially misclassified measure of C.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Bias of the observed adjusted natural direct effect (NDE) as a function of sensitivity and specificity for two different hypothetical scenarios. The first scenario (top) has a true NDE of 1.75, a true natural indirect effect (NIE) of 1.75, and a total effect (TE) of 3.5. The second scenario (bottom) has a true NDE of 3.25, a true NIE of −0.75, and a TE of 2.5. The single solid line represents the true NDE and the double solid line the TE. The dashed line represents the observed adjusted NDE as a function of sensitivity when specificity is fixed at 0.9. The dotted line represents the observed adjusted NDE as a function of specificity when sensitivity is fixed at 0.9.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Robins JM, Greenland S. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 1992;3(2):143–155. - PubMed
    1. Pearl J. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc; 2001. Direct and indirect effects; pp. 411–420.
    1. VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(12):1339–1348. - PMC - PubMed
    1. VanderWeele TJ. Marginal structural models for the estimation of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 2009;20(1):18–26. - PubMed
    1. Ogburn EL, VanderWeele TJ. On the nondifferential misclassification of a binary confounder. Epidemiology. 2012;23(3):433–439. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types