Abstract
Background Causal graphs provide a key tool for optimizing the validity of causal effect estimates. Although a large literature exists on the mathematical theory underlying the use of causal graphs, less literature exists to aid applied researchers in understanding how best to develop and use causal graphs in their research projects.
Methods We sought to understand why researchers do or do not regularly use DAGs by surveying practicing epidemiologists and medical researchers on their knowledge, level of interest, attitudes, and practices towards the use of causal graphs in applied epidemiology and health research. We used Twitter and the Society for Epidemiologic Research to disseminate the survey.
Results Overall, a majority of participants reported being comfortable with using causal graphs and reported using them ‘sometimes’, ‘often’, or ‘always’ in their research. Having received training appeared to improve comprehension of the assumptions displayed in causal graphs. Many of the respondents who did not use causal graphs reported lack of knowledge as a barrier to using DAGs in their research.
Conclusion Causal graphs are of interest to epidemiologists and medical researchers, but there are several barriers to their uptake. Additional training and clearer guidance are needed. In addition, methodological developments regarding visualization of effect measure modification and interaction on causal graphs is needed.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was partly funded by NICHD R21HD098733 (RBM, EJM). JPD was supported by grant K12-HL138039 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Declarations Ethics Approval The survey was exempted by the Boston University School of Public Health Institutional Review Board. The surveys were completely anonymous and no IP addresses were collected.
Conflict of interest Authors state no conflict of interest
Funding EJM and RBM were partly funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) R21HD098733.
JPD was supported by grant K12-HL138039 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).
ECC was supported by grant K01HD100222 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
Availability of data and material The full survey used to obtain these results is included in the supplementary material.
Revised results section for clarity; added recruitment tweets to supplement; updated tables and figures
Data Availability
The data will not be publicly available under the terms of the informed consent given by survey respondents.
