Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Abstract:
Here, we explain and illustrate a geometric perspective on causal inference in cohort studies that can help epidemiologists understand the role of standardization in causal inference as well as the distinctions between confounding, effect modification, and noncollapsibility. For simplicity, we focus on a binary exposure X, a binary outcome D, and a binary confounder C that is not causally affected by X. Rothman diagrams plot risk in the unexposed on the x-axis and risk in the exposed on the y-axis. The crude risks define one point in the unit square, and the stratum-specific risks define two other points in the unit square. These three points can be used to identify confounding and effect modification, and we show briefly how these concepts generalize to confounders with more than two levels. We propose a simplified but equivalent definition of collapsibility in terms of standardization, and we show that a measure of association is collapsible if and only if all of its contour lines are straight. We illustrate these ideas using data from a study conducted in Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, where the causal effect of smoking on 20-year mortality was confounded by age. We conclude that causal inference should be taught using geometry before using regression models.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Causality in Epidemiology
Introduction to Epidemiology
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Bias in Epidemiological Studies

