Estimation of Controlled Direct Effects
受控直接效应的估计AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要明确讨论中介路径、暴露后混杂与受控直接因果效应的识别和估计。
受控直接效应的估计AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Summary When regression models adjust for mediators on the causal path from exposure to outcome, the regression coefficient of exposure is commonly viewed as a measure of the direct exposure effect. This interpretation can be misleading, even with a randomly assigned exposure. This is because adjustment for post-exposure measurements introduces bias whenever their association with the outcome is confounded by more than just the exposure. By the same token, adjustment for such confounders stays problematic when these are themselves affected by the exposure. Robins accommodated this by introducing linear structural nested direct effect models with direct effect parameters that can be estimated by using inverse probability weighting by a conditional distribution of the mediator. The resulting estimators are consistent, but inefficient, and can be extremely unstable when the mediator is absolutely continuous. We develop direct effect estimators which are not only more efficient but also consistent under a less demanding model for a conditional expectation of the outcome. We find that the one estimator which avoids inverse probability weighting altogether performs best. This estimator is intuitive, computationally straightforward and, as demonstrated by simulation, competes extremely well with ordinary least squares estimators in settings where standard regression is valid.