On the Consistency Rule in Causal Inference
Top Cited Papers
- 1 November 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Epidemiology
- Vol. 21 (6) , 872-875
- https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0b013e3181f5d3fd
Abstract
In 2 recent communications, Cole and Frangakis (Epidemiology. 2009; 20: 3-5) and VanderWeele (Epidemiology. 2009;20: 880-883) conclude that the consistency rule used in causal inference is an assumption that precludes any side-effects of treatment/exposure on the outcomes of interest. They further develop auxiliary notation to make this assumption formal and explicit. I argue that the consistency rule is a theorem in the logic of counterfactuals and need not be altered. Instead, warnings of potential side-effects should be embodied in standard modeling practices that make causal assumptions explicit and transparent.This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- An Introduction to Causal InferenceThe International Journal of Biostatistics, 2010
- Concerning the Consistency Assumption in Causal InferenceEpidemiology, 2009
- The Consistency Statement in Causal InferenceEpidemiology, 2009
- Causal Diagrams for Epidemiologic ResearchEpidemiology, 1999
- An Axiomatic Characterization of Causal CounterfactualsFoundations of Science, 1998
- On the Application of Probability Theory to Agricultural Experiments. Essay on Principles. Section 9Statistical Science, 1990
- A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—application to control of the healthy worker survivor effectMathematical Modelling, 1986
- Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974