TY - JOUR
T1 - Causal inference in suicide research
T2 - When you should (and should not!) control for extraneous variables
AU - Cero, Ian
AU - Mitchell, Sean M.
AU - Morris, Nicole M.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was partially supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (T32 MH020061; L30 MH120575; L30 MH120727).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The American Association of Suicidology
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Objective: Although causal inference is often straightforward in experimental contexts, few research questions in suicide are amenable to experimental manipulation and randomized control. Instead, suicide prevention specialists must rely on observational data and statistical control of confounding variables to make effective causal inferences. We provide a brief summary of recent covariate practice and a tutorial on casual inference tools for covariate selection in suicide research. Method: We provide an introduction to modern causal inference tools, suggestions for statistical control selection, and demonstrations using simulated data. Results: Statistical controls are often mistakenly selected due to their significant correlation with other study variables, their consistency with previous research, or no explicit reason at all. We clarify what it means to control for a variable and when controlling for the wrong covariates systematically distorts results. We describe directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and tools for identifying the right choice of covariates. Finally, we provide four best practices for integrating causal inference tools in future studies. Conclusion: The use of causal model tools, such as DAGs, allows researchers to carefully and thoughtfully select statistical controls and avoid presenting distorted findings; however, limitations of this approach are discussed.
AB - Objective: Although causal inference is often straightforward in experimental contexts, few research questions in suicide are amenable to experimental manipulation and randomized control. Instead, suicide prevention specialists must rely on observational data and statistical control of confounding variables to make effective causal inferences. We provide a brief summary of recent covariate practice and a tutorial on casual inference tools for covariate selection in suicide research. Method: We provide an introduction to modern causal inference tools, suggestions for statistical control selection, and demonstrations using simulated data. Results: Statistical controls are often mistakenly selected due to their significant correlation with other study variables, their consistency with previous research, or no explicit reason at all. We clarify what it means to control for a variable and when controlling for the wrong covariates systematically distorts results. We describe directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and tools for identifying the right choice of covariates. Finally, we provide four best practices for integrating causal inference tools in future studies. Conclusion: The use of causal model tools, such as DAGs, allows researchers to carefully and thoughtfully select statistical controls and avoid presenting distorted findings; however, limitations of this approach are discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85101315006&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/sltb.12681
DO - 10.1111/sltb.12681
M3 - Article
C2 - 33624879
AN - SCOPUS:85101315006
SN - 0363-0234
VL - 51
SP - 148
EP - 161
JO - Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior
JF - Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior
IS - 1
ER -