Response to: Methodological point on mediation analysis

Tania King, Zoe Aitken, Allison Milner, Eric Emerson, Naomi Priest, Amalia Karahalios, Anne Kavanagh, Tony Blakely

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

Abstract

We thank Mokhayeri and Mansournia for their considered comments relating to our recent article, and we are happy to clarify some points raised.

As with all approaches, there are advantages and disadvantages of the methods we used here, and our paper acknowledges some key limitations related to our approach. Although we do not explicitly define each of the assumptions underpinning our methods, we reference the seminal paper that delineates these assumptions. Our paper acknowledges the assumption of no unmeasured confounding of the mediator–outcome relationship, and indeed we did not identify any variables likely to confound this relationship.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1731-1732
Number of pages2
JournalInternational journal of epidemiology
Volume48
Issue number5
Early online date9 Jun 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2019
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • mediation analysis
  • methodological approaches
  • parametric models
  • Causal mediation
  • measurement error
  • bias

Cite this