Paper detail

Mediation effects that emulate a target randomised trial: Simulation-based evaluation of ill-defined interventions on multiple mediators

Many epidemiological questions concern potential interventions to alter the pathways presumed to mediate an association. For example, we consider a study that investigates the benefit of interventions in young adulthood for ameliorating the poorer mid-life psychosocial outcomes of adolescent self-harmers relative to their healthy peers. Two methodological challenges arise. Firstly, mediation methods have hitherto mostly focused on the elusive task of discovering pathways, rather than on the evaluation of mediator interventions. Secondly, the complexity of such questions is invariably such that there are no existing data on well-defined interventions (i.e. actual treatments, programs, etc.) capturing the populations, outcomes and time-spans of interest. Instead, researchers must rely on exposure (non-intervention) data to address these questions, such as self-reported substance use and employment. We address the resulting challenges by specifying a target trial addressing three policy-relevant questions, regarding the impacts of hypothetical (rather than actual) interventions that would shift the mediators' distributions (separately, jointly or sequentially) to user-specified distributions that can be emulated with the observed data. We then define novel interventional effects that map to this trial, emulating shifts by setting mediators to random draws from those distributions. We show that estimation using a g-computation method is possible under an expanded set of causal assumptions relative to inference with well-defined interventions. These expanded assumptions reflect the lower level of evidence that is inevitable with ill-defined interventions. Application to the self-harm example using data from the Victorian Adolescent Health Cohort Study illustrates the value of our proposal for informing the design and evaluation of actual interventions in the future.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.