Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 56 references

Quantile Mediation Analytics

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Quantile mediation effects have closed-form expressions and a valid adaptive bootstrap test under a Gaussian-copula structural model.

desk verdict Useful parametric quantile mediation machinery with a genuinely new composite-null bootstrap; the causal claims are model-conditional and should be framed that way. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15401 v1 pith:F57BQVAT submitted 2024-12-19 stat.ME

Canyi Chen , Yinqiu He , Huixia J. Wang , Gongjun Xu , Peter X.-K. Song This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.ME MSC 62H0562G0562G2062F0362P10
keywords quantilemediationGaussiancopulaadaptivebootstrapcompositenullhypothesiscounterfactualeffectsnaturalindirecteffectgeneralizedstructuralequationmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proposes a full quantile extension of mediation analysis: it defines quantile natural direct and indirect effects (qNDE and qNIE) in a counterfactual framework and shows that, under a Gaussian-copula structural equation model with sequential ignorability, both have closed-form expressions in terms of the outcome's conditional quantile function. It proves that the indirect effect vanishes exactly when the product of the exposure-to-mediator and mediator-to-outcome coefficients is zero, and the direct effect vanishes exactly when the direct-path coefficient is zero. It then develops an adaptive bootstrap test for no mediation that handles the composite null structure, where the product can be zero because either coefficient is zero or both are, and proves bootstrap consistency so that type I error is controlled at any quantile level. The practical payoff is that mediation pathways can be tested at clinically relevant quantiles such as the 95th percentile of BMI, as illustrated in a study of phthalate exposure, lipid mediators, and childhood obesity.

What carries the argument

The central object is the generalized structural equation model built from a Gaussian copula. The DAG topology is encoded in an adjacency matrix $\Theta = \mathrm{LT}(\alpha_S, \gamma_S, \beta_M)$, and the induced correlation matrix $\Gamma'$ has entries such as $\mathrm{corr}(S,Y) = \eta/(\eta^2+\beta_M^2+1)^{1/2}$ with $\eta = \alpha_S\beta_M + \gamma_S$. With normal scores $z_s = \Phi^{-1}\{F_{S|X}(s|x)\}$ and $\delta_Y = (\eta^2+\beta_M^2+1)^{1/2}$, the Theorem 1 formulas express qNIE and qNDE as differences of $Q_{Y|X}\{\Phi(\Delta_{s',s}(\tau)) | x\}$, where $\Delta_{s',s}(\tau) = \{\gamma_S z_{s'} + \alpha_S\beta_M z_s + \Phi^{-1}(\tau)(1+\beta_M^2)^{1/2}\}/\delta_Y$. The adaptive bootstrap mixes the ordinary bootstrap with an $n^{-1}$-scaled statistic $R^*_n(b_\alpha,b_\beta)$ whose flags $I^*_{\alpha_S,\lambda_n}I^*_{\beta_M,\lambda_n}$ isolate the singular point $(\alpha_S,\beta_M)=(0,0)$, giving a bootstrap that is consistent under all three null subspaces.

What would settle it

Simulate data from a non-Gaussian copula such as a t-copula with the same margins and set $\alpha_S\beta_M=0$; if the adaptive bootstrap rejects at a rate well above the nominal level in large samples, or if the closed-form qNIE estimate differs systematically from the true counterfactual contrast computed by simulation, the copula-specific identification claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under the generalized SEM with a Gaussian copula and the usual sequential ignorability conditions, the quantile natural direct and indirect effects are not only identifiable but available in closed form: $qNIE_\tau(s,s';x) = Q_{Y|X}\{\Phi(\Delta_{s',s'}(\tau))|x\} - Q_{Y|X}\{\Phi(\Delta_{s',s}(\tau))|x\}$ and $qNDE_\tau(s,s';x) = Q_{Y|X}\{\Phi(\Delta_{s',s}(\tau))|x\} - Q_{Y|X}\{\Phi(\Delta_{s,s}(\tau))|x\}$. The paper proves that qNIE is zero if and only if $\alpha_S\beta_M=0$ and qNDE is zero if and only if $\gamma_S=0$, so the composite null of no mediation is a product-zero hypothesis. It then constructs an adaptive bootstrap statistic $U^*_\tau$ that is bootstrap-consistent under the composite null; simulations show it controls type I error under all three null subspaces and under random mixtures of them, while ordinary bootstrap, Sobel-type, and joint-significance tests become conservative or invalid, especially at the singular point where both coefficients are zero. The methodology is illustrated at $\tau=0.95$ on the ELEMENT cohort, where it detects seven lipid mediators of the phthalate-to-childhood-obesity pathway that competing tests miss.

Load-bearing premise

The Gaussian copula correctly captures the joint dependence of exposure, mediator, and outcome given confounders; if it does not, the closed-form effects and the test are measuring a model parameter rather than the true causal mediation effect.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At any quantile, no indirect effect is equivalent to $\alpha_S\beta_M=0$, and no direct effect is equivalent to $\gamma_S=0$, reducing both mediation questions to product-zero parameter tests.
  • The plug-in maximum likelihood estimator of qNIE and qNDE has mean squared error that shrinks quadratically in sample size when $(\alpha_S,\beta_M)=(0,0)$ and linearly otherwise, matching the two convergence rates established by Theorem 2.
  • The adaptive bootstrap test produces approximately uniform p-values under each of the three null subspaces and under mixtures of them, whereas Sobel-type, joint-significance, and ordinary bootstrap tests become conservative or invalid.
  • In the ELEMENT study, the set-level Cauchy combination across 158 lipid mediators is significant only for the adaptive bootstrap, and seven individual lipids are identified as mediators of the phthalate-to-childhood-obesity pathway at an FDR of 0.1.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: because the qNIE profile is driven by a single normal-quantile drift term, the closed forms imply a monotone ordering of indirect effects across $\tau$ whenever $\alpha_S\beta_M$ has one sign; one could test quantile-specific mediation by comparing qNIE estimates at two levels.
  • Beyond the paper: the adaptive pretest effectively separates the singular null subspace from the other two, so the same construction could yield uniformly valid confidence intervals for qNIE or sample-size formulas based on local alternatives.
  • Beyond the paper: the closed forms depend on the Gaussian copula, so replacing it with a heavier-tailed or asymmetric copula would be a natural robustness check; the goodness-of-fit test used here could screen mediators before applying the test.
  • Beyond the paper: a joint test for multiple mediators could be built directly from the closed-form gradients, avoiding the Cauchy combination step; this is the multi-mediator extension the authors list as future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops quantile mediation analysis under a Gaussian-copula generalized structural equation model. It defines counterfactual conditional quantile natural direct and indirect effects, derives closed-form expressions for these estimands, and shows inside the model that the qNIE is zero if and only if the product alpha_S beta_M is zero and the qNDE is zero if and only if gamma_S is zero. To test the composite null that the qNIE is zero, the paper proposes an adaptive bootstrap procedure that first distinguishes the three null subspaces and then uses either the classical bootstrap or a specially constructed bootstrap statistic designed for the singular subspace. The method is studied in simulations and applied to an ELEMENT cohort analysis of phthalate exposure, lipid mediators, and childhood obesity, where seven lipids are declared significant at an FDR of 0.1.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper makes a useful contribution: it gives interpretable closed-form quantile mediation estimands under a flexible parametric copula model and offers a test that addresses the composite-null problem more effectively than existing Sobel-type and bootstrap methods. The mixture-of-nulls simulation design is thoughtful, and the real-data analysis includes both sensitivity analysis and a goodness-of-fit check, which are commendable. However, the causal interpretation of the estimands and the type-I-error claim for the causal null are conditional on correct specification of the Gaussian-copula model, and several technical and presentation issues currently prevent full verification of the central claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.2 (Theorem 1) and §3.5] The identification theorem and the equivalence qNIE=0 iff alpha_S beta_M=0 are derived entirely inside the Gaussian-copula generalized SEM. If the copula or any marginal distribution is misspecified, the plug-in estimator does not estimate the true counterfactual quantile natural indirect effect, and the 'if and only if' statement need not hold for the true counterfactual distributions. The goodness-of-fit test described in Section 3.5 and Figure 6(b) checks fit of the observed joint distribution only; it cannot rule out misspecification in counterfactual regimes and cannot validate the sequential ignorability assumption in Condition 2. Because the real-data discovery claim and the statement that the test controls type I error for the causal null rely on this, the paper should either explicitly reframe the estimands as model-based causal quantities or provide additional robustness checks (for example, over a class of copulas or via a sensitivity analysis that perturbs the copula dependence) and should state more carefully that the GoF test does not address Condition 2.
  2. [§3 (Condition 3)] Condition 3 states that the parameter space Theta_0 subset R^{3p+6} is 'open and compact.' No nonempty open subset of Euclidean space is compact, so the condition as written is internally inconsistent. This is not merely cosmetic because Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 rely on this regularity condition for the score and information calculations. Please rephrase the condition, for example as a compact parameter space whose interior contains theta_0, and verify that the proofs go through under the corrected condition.
  3. [Theorems 1–3 and Proposition 1 (Supplementary Material)] All proofs of the main theoretical results are deferred to an online Supplementary Material that is not included in this arXiv version. Since Theorem 3's bootstrap consistency is the main technical contribution and involves nonstandard rates of convergence, the referee cannot verify the central claims from the submitted manuscript. Please include the supplementary proofs in the review version or add an appendix with the key steps of Theorems 1–3.
  4. [§4.2 (Table 1)] In Table 1, the rows for (alpha_S, beta_M)=(0,0.5) and (alpha_S, beta_M)=(0.5,0.5) are identical for both qNIE_tau and qNDE_tau, which is numericallly impossible under different structural parameters and appears to be a copy-and-paste error. This table is the main evidence for the claimed n^{-1} versus n^{-1/2} convergence rates in estimation, so the error is load-bearing for the simulation conclusions. Please correct the table and rerun the affected simulations.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§2.2 (Theorem 1)] The theorem statement should explicitly require s' != s; otherwise qNIE_tau(s,s';x)=0 and qNDE_tau(s,s';x)=0 hold trivially regardless of alpha_S beta_M and gamma_S, so the 'if and only if' statements need the nonzero exposure contrast.
  2. [§3.4] The heading 'Choice of the tunning parameter' contains a typo; it should be 'tuning parameter.' The same applies to 'model diagonosis for copula spcification' in Section 3.5.
  3. [§4.2] The sentence 'the structural parameters (alpha_S, beta_M) are selected from different combinations in {0, 0.5, 0.5}' is ambiguous because the set contains 0.5 twice; it should presumably be {0,0.5} or otherwise clarify which combinations were included.
  4. [Example 2 and Figure 2] Example 2 states that X is identically 1 (no confounding), but the Figure 2 caption says X ~ N(0,1); these are inconsistent and should be reconciled.
  5. [§5] In the paragraph reporting the Cauchy combination test p-values, the last entry reads '0.3574 (JS-YM.' and is missing the closing parenthesis.
  6. [§1 and §2.1] There are several typographical errors, including 'attrative interpretability' in Section 2.1 and 'poential outcomes' in Condition 2; a careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: closed-form qNIE/qNDE and the alpha*beta=0 equivalence follow from the GSEM assumptions, not from imposed constraints; self-citations are foundational rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived, not assumed. Theorem 1 obtains the closed forms for qNDE and qNIE by algebra from the Gaussian-copula joint distribution in (2.1) together with Conditions 1 and 2; the equivalence qNIE=0 iff alpha_S*beta_M=0 follows from strict monotonicity of the conditional quantile function in the normal-score argument Delta, so it is a mathematical consequence of the model rather than a fitted or definitional constraint. The adaptive bootstrap consistency in Theorem 3 is proved under Conditions 1-3 via local asymptotic analysis; although the pretest flags use estimated parameters, the limiting null distribution is derived and the bootstrap statistic is constructed from that distribution, so this is not a fitted quantity being relabeled as a prediction. The paper does rely on prior work by overlapping authors, notably Hao et al. (2023) for the generalized SEM and He et al. (2023) for the adaptive-bootstrap idea, and on Zhang et al. (2016) for the goodness-of-fit test, but these are prior foundations or tools, not unverified results whose assumed truth forces the conclusion. The genuine limitation is model dependence: if the Gaussian copula is misspecified, the estimands are not the true causal counterfactual quantile effects and the test targets a fitted-model parameter rather than the causal null. That is an external-validity and misspecification concern, not circularity. The score of 2 reflects the presence of non-load-bearing self-citation, not a reduction of the derivation to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the generalized SEM being the true data-generating mechanism, on sequential ignorability, and on standard asymptotic regularity. The only hand-chosen tuning constant is lambda=2 in the bootstrap threshold. All structural and marginal parameters are estimated from data by IFM, so they are not additional hand-picked inputs. The paper introduces no new entities beyond standard counterfactuals.

free parameters (1)
  • lambda in adaptive bootstrap threshold = 2 (chosen in all experiments)
    The threshold lambda_n = lambda n^{1/2}/log n is used to pretest whether alpha_S and beta_M are zero. Theory only requires lambda_n -> infinity and lambda_n = o(n^{1/2}); the value lambda=2 is a hand-chosen constant that the authors say worked well in simulations.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (Condition 1): M = M(S) and Y = Y(S, M(S)).
    Standard causal consistency assumption used to link potential outcomes to observed data; invoked before Theorem 1.
  • domain assumption Sequential Ignorability (Condition 2): (i) {Y(s,m), M(s')} independent of S given X = x; (ii) Y(s,m) independent of M(s') given S = s', X = x.
    Unverifiable causal identification assumption; the paper performs a sensitivity analysis in Section 5 but cannot test it directly.
  • domain assumption The joint distribution of (S,M,Y|X) is exactly a Gaussian copula with dependence matrix Gamma' in (A.1).
    All closed-form results in Theorem 1 rely on this parametric specification. The goodness-of-fit test in Section 3.5 checks it empirically but cannot prove it.
  • domain assumption Marginal distributions of S, M, Y given X are correctly specified exponential dispersion models with known link functions.
    Plug-in estimation of Q_{Y|X} and F_{S|X} requires correct marginals; for example, BMI is modeled as Gamma in Section 5.
  • ad hoc to paper Condition 3: the parameter space is open and compact and standard score/curvature regularity holds.
    As written, an open and compact nonempty subset of Euclidean space cannot exist, so the condition is internally inconsistent. Read charitably as a bounded regularity condition, it underpins Theorems 2 and 3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantile Mediation Analytics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F57BQVAT

@misc{pith2026241215401,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantile Mediation Analytics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F57BQVAT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15401}
}
read the original abstract

Mediation analytics help examine if and how an intermediate variable mediates the influence of an exposure variable on an outcome of interest. Quantiles, rather than the mean, of an outcome are scientifically relevant to the comparison among specific subgroups in practical studies. Albeit some empirical studies available in the literature, there lacks a thorough theoretical investigation of quantile-based mediation analysis, which hinders practitioners from using such methods to answer important scientific questions. To address this significant technical gap, in this paper, we develop a quantile mediation analysis methodology to facilitate the identification, estimation, and testing of quantile mediation effects under a hypothesized directed acyclic graph. We establish two key estimands, quantile natural direct effect (qNDE) and quantile natural indirect effect (qNIE), in the counterfactual framework, both of which have closed-form expressions. To overcome the issue that the null hypothesis of no mediation effect is composite, we establish a powerful adaptive bootstrap method that is shown theoretically and numerically to achieve a proper type I error control. We illustrate the proposed quantile mediation analysis methodology through both extensive simulation experiments and a real-world dataset in that we investigate the mediation effect of lipidomic biomarkers for the influence of exposure to phthalates on early childhood obesity clinically diagnosed by 95\% percentile of body mass index.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15401 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Directed acyclic graphs for unconfounded and confounded mediation models in (A) and (B), respectively. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Plots of the qNDE in (A) and qNIE in (B) under a generalized SEM with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Q-Q plots of 𝑝-values under the three cases of fixed null hypotheses with sample size 𝑛 = 300. Setting II: A mixture of nulls. In this simulation design, we vary the configuration of the null hypotheses. That is, at each replication, a null is randomly drawn from 𝐻Ω0,1 , 𝐻Ω0,2 and 𝐻Ω0,3 defined above in Setting I. We consider three selection probabilities: (A) (1/3, 1/3, 1/3), (B) (0.2, 0.2, 0.6), and (C) (0.05, 0.0… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Q-Q plots of 𝑝-values under the non-fixed null hypotheses with these selection probabilities and sample size 𝑛 = 300 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Empirical rejection rate of the six tests over signal strength of the mediation pathway. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The estimated breakpoint of the absolute correlation at which qNIE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid.sentence := #2 '...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    Baron, R. M. & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51, 1173--1182

    work page 1986

  4. [4]

    & Hochberg, Y

    Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 57, 289--300

    work page 1995

  5. [5]

    , VanderWeele, T

    Bind, M.-A. , VanderWeele, T. J. , Schwartz, J. D. & Coull, B. A. (2017). Quantile causal mediation analysis allowing longitudinal data. Statistics in Medicine 36, 4182--4195

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    About child and teen BMI

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2022). About child and teen BMI . https://bit.ly/49ywvvQ

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Chen, X. (2007). Chapter 76 large sample sieve estimation of semi-nonparametric models. In Handbook of Econometrics , vol. 6. Elsevier , pp. 5549--5632

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    & Xiao, H

    Drton, M. & Xiao, H. (2016). Wald tests of singular hypotheses. Bernoulli 22, 38--59

    work page 2016

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    , Renault, E

    Dufour, J.-M. , Renault, E. & Zinde-Walsh , V. (2013). Wald tests when restrictions are locally singular. ArXiv:1312.0569

    2013 arXiv

  2. [10]

    & Waugh, F

    Frisch, R. & Waugh, F. V. (1933). Partial time regressions as compared with individual trends. Econometrica 1, 387--401

    1933

  3. [11]

    Glonek, G. F. V. (1993). On the behaviour of Wald statistics for the disjunction of two regular hypotheses. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 55, 749--755

    1993

  4. [12]

    Guo, X. , Li, R. , Liu, J. & Zeng, M. (2022). High-dimensional mediation analysis for selecting DNA methylation loci mediating childhood trauma and cortisol stress reactivity. Journal of the American Statistical Association 117, 1110--1121

    2022

  5. [13]

    , Chen, C

    Hao, W. , Chen, C. & Song, P. X.-K. (2023). A class of directed acyclic graphs with mixed data types in mediation analysis. ArXiv:2311.17867

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    & Song, P

    Hao, W. & Song, P. X.-K. (2024). A simultaneous likelihood test for joint mediation effects of multiple mediators. Statistica Sinica

    2024

  7. [15]

    , Song, P

    He, Y. , Song, P. X. K. & Xu, G. (2023). Adaptive bootstrap tests for composite null hypotheses in the mediation pathway analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 0

    2023

  8. [16]

    Horvath, S. (2013). DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biology 14, R115

    2013

  9. [17]

    , Huber, M

    Hsu, Y.-C. , Huber, M. & Yen, Y.-M. (2023). Doubly robust estimation of direct and indirect quantile treatment effects with machine learning. ArXiv:2307.01049

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    , Schelker, M

    Huber, M. , Schelker, M. & Strittmatter, A. (2022). Direct and indirect effects based on changes-in-changes. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 40, 432--443

    2022

  11. [19]

    , Keele, L

    Imai, K. , Keele, L. & Tingley, D. (2010 a ). A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychological Methods 15, 309--334

    2010

  12. [20]

    , Keele, L

    Imai, K. , Keele, L. & Yamamoto, T. (2010 b ). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science 25, 51--71

    2010

  13. [21]

    Joe, H. (2005). Asymptotic efficiency of the two-stage estimation method for copula-based models. Journal of Multivariate Analysis 94, 401--419

    2005

  14. [22]

    J rgensen, B. (1987). Exponential dispersion models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 49, 127--145

    1987

  15. [23]

    Juvanhol, L. L. , Lana, R. M. , Cabrelli, R. , Bastos, L. S. , Nobre, A. A. , Rotenberg, L. & Griep, R. H. (2016). Factors associated with overweight: Are the conclusions influenced by choice of the regression method? BMC public health 16, 642

    2016

  16. [24]

    , Shi, C

    Li, T. , Shi, C. , Lu, Z. , Li, Y. & Zhu, H. (2023). Evaluating Dynamic Conditional Quantile Treatment Effects with Applications in Ridesharing

    2023

  17. [25]

    & Xie, J

    Liu, Y. & Xie, J. (2020). Cauchy combination test: A powerful test with analytic p-value calculation under arbitrary dependency structures. Journal of the American Statistical Association 115, 393--402

    2020

  18. [26]

    , Shen, J

    Liu, Z. , Shen, J. , Barfield, R. , Schwartz, J. , Baccarelli, A. A. & Lin, X. (2022). Large- Scale Hypothesis Testing for Causal Mediation Effects with Applications in Genome-wide Epigenetic Studies . Journal of the American Statistical Association 117, 67--81

    2022

  19. [27]

    Pearl, J. (2014). Interpretation and identification of causal mediation. Psychological Methods 19, 459--481

    2014

  20. [28]

    , Tamayo-Ortiz , M

    Perng, W. , Tamayo-Ortiz , M. , Tang, L. , S \'a nchez, B. N. , Cantoral, A. , Meeker, J. D. et al. (2019). Early life exposure in mexico to environmental toxicants ( ELEMENT ) project. BMJ Open 9, e030427

    2019

  21. [29]

    Rubin, D. B. (1980). Randomization analysis of experimental data: The fisher randomization test comment. Journal of the American Statistical Association 75, 591--593

    1980

  22. [30]

    , Chou, C.-P

    Shen, E. , Chou, C.-P. , Pentz, M. A. & Berhane, K. (2014). Quantile mediation models: A comparison of methods for assessing mediation across the outcome distribution. Multivariate Behavioral Research 49, 471--485

    2014

  23. [31]

    & VanderWeele, T

    Shpitser, I. & VanderWeele, T. J. (2011). A complete graphical criterion for the adjustment formula in mediation analysis. The International Journal of Biostatistics 7, 16

    2011

  24. [32]

    Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology 13, 290

    1982

  25. [33]

    Song, P. X.-K. (2000). Multivariate dispersion models generated from Gaussian copula. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 27, 305--320

    2000

  26. [34]

    , Mochida, T

    Take, K. , Mochida, T. , Maki, T. , Satomi, Y. , Hirayama, M. , Nakakariya, M. et al. (2016). Pharmacological inhibition of monoacylglycerol o-acyltransferase 2 improves hyperlipidemia, obesity, and Diabetes by change in intestinal fat utilization. PLoS ONE 11, e0150976

    2016

  27. [35]

    van der Vaart, A. W. (1998). Asymptotic Statistics . Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press

    1998

  28. [36]

    VanderWeele, T. (2015). Explanation in Causal Inference : Methods for Mediation and Interaction . New York : Oxford University Press , 1st ed

    2015

  29. [37]

    VanderWeele, T. J. & Vansteelandt, S. (2010). Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. American Journal of Epidemiology 172, 1339--1348

    2010

  30. [38]

    Wang, H. J. , Feng, X. & Dong, C. (2018 a ). Copula-based quantile regression for longitudinal data. Statistica Sinica 29, 245--264

    2018

  31. [39]

    Wang, H. J. , McKeague, I. W. & Qian, M. (2018 b ). Testing for marginal linear effects in quantile regression. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Statistical Methodology) 80, 433--452

    2018

  32. [40]

    Wang, W. & Yu, P. (2023). Nonequivalence of two least-absolute-deviation estimators for mediation effects. TEST 32, 370--387

    2023

  33. [41]

    Yang, T. C. , Peterson, K. E. , Meeker, J. D. , S \'a nchez, B. N. , Zhang, Z. , Cantoral, A. et al. (2017). Bisphenol a and phthalates in utero and in childhood: Association with child BMI z-score and adiposity. Environmental Research 156, 326--333

    2017

  34. [42]

    , Ramprasath, V

    Yuan, Q. , Ramprasath, V. R. , Harding, S. V. , Rideout, T. C. , Chan, Y.-M. & Jones, P. J. H. (2010). Diacylglycerol oil reduces body fat but does not alter energy or lipid metabolism in overweight, hypertriglyceridemic women. The Journal of Nutrition 140, 1122--1126

    2010

  35. [43]

    & MacKinnon, D

    Yuan, Y. & MacKinnon, D. P. (2014). Robust mediation analysis based on median regression. Psychological methods 19, 1--20

    2014

  36. [44]

    , Okhrin, O

    Zhang, S. , Okhrin, O. , Zhou, Q. M. & Song, P. X. K. (2016). Goodness-of-fit test for specification of semiparametric copula dependence models. Journal of Econometrics 193, 215--233

    2016

  37. [45]

    , Chen, C

    Zhang, Y. , Chen, C. & Zhu, L. (2022). Sliced independence test. Statistica Sinica 32, 2477--2496

    2022

  38. [46]

    , Song, P

    Zhou, Y. , Song, P. X.-K. & Wen, X. (2021). Structural factor equation models for causal network construction via directed acyclic mixed graphs. Biometrics 77, 573--586

    2021

  39. [47]

    , Djazayery, A

    Bagheri, M. , Djazayery, A. , Farzadfar, F. , Qi, L. , Yekaninejad, M. S. , Aslibekyan, S. , Chamari, M. , Hassani, H. , Koletzko, B. & Uhl, O. (2019). Plasma metabolomic profiling of amino acids and polar lipids in Iranian obese adults. Lipids in Health and Disease 18, 94

    2019

  40. [48]

    , Leitzmann, M

    Carayol, M. , Leitzmann, M. F. , Ferrari, P. , Zamora-Ros , R. , Achaintre, D. , Stepien, M. , Schmidt, J. A. , Travis, R. C. , Overvad, K. , Tj nneland, A. , Hansen, L. , Kaaks, R. , K \"u hn, T. , Boeing, H. , Bachlechner, U. , Trichopoulou, A. , Bamia, C. , Palli, D. , Agno...

    2017

  41. [49]

    , Boghossian, N

    Dai, J. , Boghossian, N. S. , Sarzynski, M. A. , Luo, F. , Sun, X. , Li, J. , Fiehn, O. , Liu, J. & Chen, L. (2022). Metabolome- Wide Associations of Gestational Weight Gain in Pregnant Women with Overweight and Obesity . Metabolites 12, 960

    2022

  42. [50]

    Kato, K. (2011). A note on moment convergence of bootstrap M-estimators . Statistics & Decisions 28, 51--61

    2011

  43. [51]

    LaBarre, J. (2019). Metabolomics: A Promising Tool to Improve the Understanding of the Developmental Origins of Obesity and Metabolic Disease . Thesis, University of Michigan

    2019

  44. [52]

    , Cheng, W

    Lin, K. , Cheng, W. , Shen, Q. , Wang, H. , Wang, R. , Guo, S. , Wu, X. , Wu, W. , Chen, P. , Wang, Y. , Ye, H. , Zhang, Q. & Wang, R. (2023). Lipid Profiling Reveals Lipidomic Signatures of Weight Loss Interventions . Nutrients 15, 1784

    2023

  45. [53]

    , Garc \'i a-Gavil \'a n, J

    Papandreou, C. , Garc \'i a-Gavil \'a n, J. , Camacho-Barcia, L. , Toft Hansen, T. , Harrold, J. A. , Sj \"o din, A. , Halford, J. C. G. & Bull \'o , M. (2021). Changes in Circulating Metabolites During Weight Loss are Associated with Adiposity Improvement , and Body Weight an...

    2021

  46. [54]

    Temkin, A. M. , Bowers, R. R. , Ulmer, C. Z. , Penta, K. , Bowden, J. A. , Nyland, J. , Baatz, J. E. & Spyropoulos, D. D. (2019). Increased adiposity, inflammation, metabolic disruption and dyslipidemia in adult male offspring of DOSS treated C57BL /6 dams. Scientific Reports 9, 1530

    2019

  47. [55]

    , Holzapfel, C

    Wahl, S. , Holzapfel, C. , Yu, Z. , Breier, M. , Kondofersky, I. , Fuchs, C. , Singmann, P. , Prehn, C. , Adamski, J. , Grallert, H. , Illig, T. , Wang-Sattler , R. & Reinehr, T. (2013). Metabolomics reveals determinants of weight loss during lifestyle intervention in obese ch...

    2013

  48. [56]

    Wellner, J. A. & Zhan, Y. (1996). Bootstrapping Z-estimators . Preprinted on webpage at http://bit.ly/49x25KL

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.