Several frameworks have been proposed for studying causal mediation analysis. What these frameworks have in common is that they all make assumptions for point identifications that can be violated even when treatment is randomized. When a causal effect is not point-identified, one can sometimes derive bounds, i.e. a range of possible values that are consistent with the observed data. In this work, we study causal bounds for mediation effects under both the natural effects framework and the separable effects framework. In particular, we show that when there are unmeasured confounders for the intermediate variables(s) the sharp symbolic bounds on separable (in)direct effect coincide with existing bounds for natural (in)direct effects in the analogous setting. We compare these bounds to valid bounds for the natural direct effects when only the cross-world independence assumption does not hold. Furthermore, we demonstrate the use and compare the results of the bounds on data from a trial investigating the effect of peanut consumption on the development of peanut allergy in infants through specific pathways of measured immunological biomarkers.
翻译:研究因果中介分析已提出了若干框架。这些框架的共同之处在于,它们均对点识别作出了假设,这些假设即使在处理随机化时也可能被违反。当因果效应无法点识别时,有时可以推导出边界,即与观测数据一致的可能取值范围。在本研究中,我们分别在自然效应框架和可分离效应框架下探讨了中介效应的因果边界。具体而言,我们证明,当存在中间变量的未测量混杂因素时,可分离(间)接效应的尖锐符号边界与类似设定下现有自然(间)接效应的边界一致。我们将这些边界与仅当跨世界独立性假设不成立时自然直接效应的有效边界进行了比较。此外,我们通过一项试验数据,演示并比较了这些边界在探究花生摄入通过特定测量的免疫生物标志物通路对婴儿花生过敏发展影响中的应用结果。