-varying covariate (e.g., presence of emphysema) that is a predictor of both future exposure and of failure. In 1982, the standard analytic approach was to model the conditional probability (i.e., the hazard) of failure time $t$ as a function of past exposure history using a time-dependent Cox proportional hazards model. Robins formally showed that, even when confounding by unmeasured factors and model specification are absent, this approach may result in estimates of effect that may fail to have a causal interpretation, regardless of whether or not one also adjusts for the measured time-dependent confounders in the analysis. In fact, if previous exposure also predicts the subsequent evolution of the time-dependent confounders (e.g., since smoking is a cause of emphysema, it predicts this disease) then the standard approach can find an artifactual exposure effect even under the sharp null hypothesis of no net, direct or indirect effect of exposure on the failure time of any subject.

Prior to @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]), although informal discussions of net, direct and indirect (i.e., mediated) effects of time varying exposures were to be found in the discussion sections of most epidemiologic papers, no formal mathematical definitions existed. To address this, @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) introduced a new counterfactual model, the *finest fully randomized causally interpreted structured tree graph* (FFRCISTG)[^4] model that extended the point treatment counterfactual model of @neyman:sur:1923 ([-@neyman:sur:1923]) and @rubin:estimating:1974 ([-@rubin:estimating:1974; -@Rubi:baye:1978])[^5] to longitudinal studies with time-varying treatments, direct and indirect effects and feedback of one cause on another. Due to his lack of formal statistical training, the notation and formalisms in @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) differ from those found in the mainstream literature; as a consequence the paper can be a difficult read.[^6] @richardson:robins:2013 ([-@richardson:robins:2013], Appendix C) present the FFRCISTG model using a more familiar notation.[^7]

![Causal tree graph depicting a simple scenario with treatments at two times $A_1$, $
-varying covariate (e.g.,   presence of emphysema) that is a predictor of both future exposure and of bankruptcy. In 1982, the standard analytic overture was to model the conditional probability (i.e., the hazard) of failure meter $ t$ as a routine of past exposure history using a prison term - subject Cox proportional hazards exemplar. Robins formally showed that, even when confounding by immeasurable factors and model specification are absent, this overture may result in estimates of effect that may fail to have a causal interpretation, regardless of whether or not one besides adjusts for the measured time - subject confounders in the analysis. In fact, if previous vulnerability also predict the subsequent evolution of the time - dependent confounders (e.g.,   since smoking is a lawsuit of emphysema, it predicts this disease) then the standard approach can find an artifactual exposure effect even under the sharp null hypothesis of no net, direct or indirect effect of exposure on the failure time of any subject. 

 Prior to @robins:1986 ([ -@robins:1986 ]), although informal discussions of internet, direct and indirect (i.e.,   mediate) effect of time varying exposures were to be determine in the discussion sections of most epidemiologic papers, no formal mathematical definition existed. To address this, @robins:1986 ([ -@robins:1986 ]) introduced a new counterfactual model, the * finest in full randomized causally interpreted structured tree graph * (FFRCISTG)[^4 ] model that extend the point discussion counterfactual exemplar of @neyman: sur:1923 ([ -@neyman: sur:1923 ]) and @rubin: estimating:1974 ([ -@rubin: estimating:1974; -@Rubi: baye:1978])[^5 ] to longitudinal studies with time - varying treatments, lineal and indirect effects and feedback of one cause on another. Due to his lack of formal statistical training, the notation and formalisms in @robins:1986 ([ -@robins:1986 ]) differ from those found in the mainstream literature; as a consequence the newspaper can be a difficult read.[^6 ] @richardson: robins:2013 ([ -@richardson: robins:2013 ], Appendix C) portray the FFRCISTG model using a more conversant notation.[^7 ] 

! [ Causal tree graph depicting a simple scenario with treatments at two times $ A_1 $, $
-varjing covariate (e.g., presenct of emphysema) thcr is a predidtor of coth future exposure and of hailyre. Ib 1982, the standard analytkc approabh was to modtl the conditional probabljity (l.e., thz iazard) of failute time $t$ as a function of pxsc exposure history using a time-depenqent Coc oroportional hwzarcf mosvl. Robins formally showed that, sven whtn confounding by inmeasured factors and modfl soecification are ahsent, this qpprjqch may resuut in estimates of effgct that may fail to have a causxl incerpretatiob, eegwtdless of whxther jr not one also adjuvts for the measured bime-dxpeneent confounders in tie analysis. In fact, yf previogs exposure also prwducts jhe sgbsedyeng ebokufion ov tie time-depehdent confoynders (e.g., since smokond is a cause or emphrsqma, it predicts this disease) then the suandadd approach can find an artifactual exposure effect eden under the sharp null hypothesis of no net, diract oc kndnvcct ddffct of exposure on the failure time of any sufnevt.

Irior to @robins:1986 ([-@rjbins:1986]), althoigj ogformal discursions of net, direct and infirect (y.e., meduated) efftcts pf time varying exposures wwre to be folnd un the discussion dections of mosj epidrmiologic papers, no foroal jathematicap definitjuns existed. To aadrvss dhis, @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) introdused a new couuterfactjal kodel, ehe *finest fulln randomized causalpy injerpreded structkred tree graph* (FFRCISTG)[^4] model viat extended jhe popnt treatient gounterfactual iodel of @neymau:sur:1923 ([-@neyian:suf:1923]) and @rubih:estimaving:1974 ([-@rubin:eseimating:1974; -@Rubi:twye:1978])[^5] to longivudinal seudiws wuth timd-xarying treatmrnts, direbt and indirect effects end wsedback of one ecuwe on another. Die go rid kasn of formal vtatkstkval tfaining, the votayion and formalisms hn @rkbins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) diffet nrom thosg found ig the mainstrram literature; as w conveqnence yhe paper can be a difficult read.[^6] @richardsln:rjbins:2013 ([-@richarqson:vobigs:2013], Appendir C) present the FFRCISTG model using a mire familiar notajion.[^7]

![Causal tree graph cepicting a simpje scenarho with treatments ar two times $A_1$, $
-varying covariate (e.g., presence of emphysema) that predictor both future and of failure. approach to model the probability (i.e., the of failure time $t$ as a of past exposure history using a time-dependent Cox proportional hazards model. Robins formally that, even when confounding by unmeasured factors and model specification are absent, this may in of that may fail to have a causal interpretation, regardless of whether or not one also adjusts the measured time-dependent confounders in the analysis. In if previous exposure also the subsequent evolution of the confounders since smoking a of it predicts this then the standard approach can find an artifactual exposure effect even under the sharp null hypothesis of net, direct effect of on failure of any subject. @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]), although informal discussions of indirect (i.e., mediated) effects of time varying exposures to be in the discussion sections of most papers, no formal mathematical definitions existed. To address @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) introduced a new counterfactual model, the *finest fully randomized causally interpreted structured tree model that extended the treatment counterfactual model @neyman:sur:1923 and ([-@rubin:estimating:1974; to longitudinal with time-varying treatments, direct and indirect effects and feedback of one on another. Due to his lack of formal statistical training, and in @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) from those found in mainstream as a consequence the be difficult Appendix present FFRCISTG model using a familiar notation.[^7] ![Causal tree graph a simple scenario with $
-varying covariate (e.g., presencE of emphyseMa) thaT is A prEdIctoR of bOth future exposURe anD of failure. In 1982, the standarD analYtIC appROaCh was To model THe CONdiTiOnAl pRoBAbIlity (I.e., tHe hazarD) of failure TimE $t$ As a function oF PaSt exposure HisTory using a tiMe-dEpendeNt cox PRoporTioNal haZards mODel. RobIns formalLy SHowed tHAt, even wHEN cOnfoUnding by unmeasureD FaCTors and model spEcificAtIOn ARE abSenT, this approAcH may rESult in eSTiMATEs oF Effect that may Fail to have a CAusAl inteRpRetATion, reGardlEsS Of wHether or not One aLso adjustS for thE MeasureD Time-depEndent ConFouNderS In ThE anAlYSis. iN fAct, IF prEvious exPoSuRe alsO preDICTS the SubSequEnt evOlution of the tIme-DepeNDenT confOundeRs (e.g., SiNce smOking iS a cauSe Of emphysema, it prEdicTs this disEasE) tHen ThE stanDArd appRoaCh cAn find aN artifaCTuaL eXPOSuRe effect even under tHe SHArP null hypOthesiS Of No NEt, direct Or IndIrecT EFfect Of exPOsUre on the FailurE TiMe Of any suBjEct.

PriOr To @rObiNs:1986 ([-@robINs:1986]), alThough Informal DiscuSSions of net, direCT and indirect (i.E., MeDIAtED) effEctS of time varyIng eXPosuRes wERe To bE Found In the DiSCuSSion sections of most ePiDemiolOgic pApers, no formal MathematicAL DEfinitioNs exIStED. To address this, @RobinS:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) intROduced a nEw couNterfactUal model, tHE *Finest fuLly RanDomIzeD CAuSally interpreTED strUcTured trEe gRaph* (FFRcIStG)[^4] mOdeL thAt Extended tHe point tReAtMeNt CouNterfACtual modEl Of @nEyMan:Sur:1923 ([-@neYMan:sur:1923]) And @ruBin:eStImATinG:1974 ([-@rubin:eSTiMATing:1974; -@ruBi:Baye:1978])[^5] To lOnGitudInal STudIes with Time-varyiNg tREatmEnTs, Direct aNd indirect effEcTs and feedbAcK of One cauSE On anotheR. Due to his lack of formal stATisticaL trAininG, the Notation aNd fOrmaliSms IN @robinS:1986 ([-@robinS:1986]) diffEr FroM THose fOUNd In tHe Mainstream LITerAture; As A conSequencE the paper can be a difFIcuLt read.[^6] @richardSon:RobiNS:2013 ([-@RiChaRDsON:roBiNS:2013], ApPENdix C) present the fFRCISTG moDeL UsIng a more faMIliAr NotatioN.[^7]

![Causal Tree gRAph depiCting a simPle scenarIo With TREatMents at two Times $A_1$, $
-varying covariate (e.g.,presence o f emp hys ema )that  isa predictor of both  future exposure and o f fai lu r e. I n  1 982,the sta n da r d  an al yt icap p ro ach w asto mode l the cond iti on al probabili t y(i.e., the  ha zard) of fai lur e time  $ t$a s a f unc tionof pas t  expos ure histo ry usinga  time-d e p en dent  Cox proportional ha z ards model. Ro bins f or m al l y  sh owe d that, ev en  when confoun d in g b y u n measured fact ors and mod e l s pecifi ca tio n  are a bsent ,t his  approach m ay r esult inestima t es of e f fect th at may  fa ilto h a ve  a  ca us a l i n te rpr e tat ion, reg ar dl ess o f wh e t h e r or  no t on e als o adjusts for  th e me a sur ed ti me-de pend en t con founde rs in  t he analysis. In  fac t, if pre vio us  ex po surea lso pr edi cts  the su bsequen t  ev ol u t i on  of the time-depen de n t  c onfounde rs (e. g .,  s i nce smok in g i s ac a use o f em p hy sema, it  predi c ts  t his dis ea se) th en  th e s tanda r d ap proach  can fin d ana rtifactual exp o sure effect e v en u nd e r th e s harp null h ypot h esis  ofn onet ,  dire ct or  i n di r ect effect of expos ur e on t he fa ilure time of  any subje c t . 

Priorto @ r ob i ns:1986 ([-@ro bins: 1986]), al t hough in forma l discus sions ofn e t, direc t a ndind ire c t  ( i.e., mediate d )  eff ec ts of t ime  varyin g e xpo sur eswe re to befound in  t he  d is cus sions ectionsof  mo st  ep idemi o logicpaper s, n ofo r mal  mathem a ti c a l de fi ni tion s e xi sted.  Toa ddr ess thi s, @robin s:1 9 86 ( [- @r obins:1 986]) introdu ce d a new co un ter factua l model, t he *finest fully random i zed cau sal ly in terp reted str uct ured t ree graph*  (FFRC ISTG) [^ 4]m o del t h a text en ded the po i n t t reatm en t co unterfa ctual model of @ne y man :sur:1923 ([- @ne yman : s ur :19 2 3] )  an d@ rub i n :estimating:197 4 ([-@rubi n: e st imating:19 7 4;-@ Rubi:ba ye:1978 ])[^5 ]  to lon gitudinal  studieswi th t i m e-v arying tre atments,  direct a n d ind i re ct ef fec ts and  f eed backof one cau se on  anoth er . Dueto hi slack offormal statistical trai ning,the n ota tion andfor m ali sms in @r obin s:1986 ([- @ro bin s:198 6]) diffe r fr o mtho s e fou nd i n  the main s tr eam l it erature; as a con seque nce the pa percan be a difficul t  read.[^6] @ri char d s on: rob i ns:2 01 3 ([-@richards on: ro b i ns:2013] ,Appendix C)  present  t h e FFR CISTGmodelusing a m or e  famil iarnot ation.[^7 ]
![ C ausal t re eg raph d epic ti ng a s imples cena r i o with treatment s att w o tim e s $ A_1$,  $ 
-varying covariate_(e.g., presence of_emphysema) that is a_predictor of_both_future exposure_and_of failure. In_1982, the standard_analytic approach was to_model the conditional_probability_(i.e., the hazard) of failure time $t$ as a function of past exposure history_using_a time-dependent_Cox_proportional_hazards model. Robins formally showed_that, even when confounding by_unmeasured factors_and model specification are absent, this approach may_result_in estimates of_effect that may fail to have a causal interpretation,_regardless of whether or not one_also adjusts for_the_measured_time-dependent confounders in the_analysis. In fact, if previous exposure_also predicts the subsequent evolution of_the time-dependent confounders (e.g., since smoking is a_cause of emphysema, it predicts this_disease) then the standard approach_can find_an artifactual exposure effect even_under the sharp_null hypothesis_of no net,_direct or indirect effect of exposure_on the failure_time of any subject.

Prior to @robins:1986_([-@robins:1986]),_although informal discussions_of_net,_direct and_indirect (i.e., mediated) effects_of_time varying_exposures_were to be found in the_discussion_sections of most epidemiologic papers, no formal_mathematical definitions existed. To_address_this, @robins:1986 ([-@robins:1986]) introduced_a new counterfactual model, the_*finest fully randomized causally interpreted structured_tree graph*_(FFRCISTG)[^4] model_that extended the point treatment counterfactual model of @neyman:sur:1923 ([-@neyman:sur:1923]) and_@rubin:estimating:1974 ([-@rubin:estimating:1974; -@Rubi:baye:1978])[^5] to longitudinal studies_with time-varying treatments, direct_and indirect_effects_and feedback of_one_cause on_another. Due to his lack of formal_statistical training,_the notation and formalisms in @robins:1986_([-@robins:1986]) differ from those_found_in the mainstream literature; as a_consequence the paper can be a_difficult read.[^6] @richardson:robins:2013 ([-@richardson:robins:2013], Appendix_C)_present_the FFRCISTG model using a_more familiar notation.[^7]

![Causal tree graph depicting_a simple scenario_with treatments at two times $A_1$, $