Literature DB >> 11135353

Efficient regression calibration for logistic regression in main study/internal validation study designs with an imperfect reference instrument.

D Spiegelman1, R J Carroll, V Kipnis.   

Abstract

An extension to the version of the regression calibration estimator proposed by Rosner et al. for logistic and other generalized linear regression models is given for main study/internal validation study designs. This estimator combines the information about the parameter of interest contained in the internal validation study with Rosner et al.'s regression calibration estimate, using a generalized inverse-variance weighted average. It is shown that the validation study selection model can be ignored as long as this model is jointly independent of the outcome and the incompletely observed covariates, conditional, at most, upon the surrogates and other completely observed covariates. In an extensive simulation study designed to follow a complex, multivariate setting in nutritional epidemiology, it is shown that with validation study sizes of 340 or more, this estimator appears to be asymptotically optimal in the sense that it is nearly unbiased and nearly as efficient as a properly specified maximum likelihood estimator. A modification to the regression calibration variance estimator which replaces the standard uncorrected logistic regression coefficient variance with the sandwich estimator to account for the possible misspecification of the logistic regression fit to the surrogate covariates in the main study, was also studied in this same simulation experiment. In this study, the alternative variance formula yielded results virtually identical to the original formula. A version of the proposed estimator is also derived for the case where the reference instrument, available only in the validation study, is imperfect but unbiased at the individual level and contains error that is uncorrelated with other covariates and with error in the surrogate instrument. Replicate measures are obtained in a subset of study participants. In this case it is shown that the validation study selection model can be ignored when sampling into the validation study depends, at most, only upon perfectly measured covariates. Two data sets, a study of fever in relation to occupational exposure to antineoplastics among hospital pharmacists and a study of breast cancer incidence in relation to dietary intakes of alcohol and vitamin A, adjusted for total energy intake, from the Nurses' Health Study, were analysed using these new methods. In these data, because the validation studies contained less than 200 observations and the events of interest were relatively rare, as is typical, the potential improvements offered by this new estimator were not apparent. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11135353     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0258(20010115)20:1<139::aid-sim644>3.0.co;2-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  38 in total

1.  Approximate and Pseudo-Likelihood Analysis for Logistic Regression Using External Validation Data to Model Log Exposure.

Authors:  Robert H Lyles; Lawrence L Kupper
Journal:  J Agric Biol Environ Stat       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 1.524

2.  Adjusting effect estimates for unmeasured confounding with validation data using propensity score calibration.

Authors:  Til Stürmer; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jerry Avorn; Robert J Glynn
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2005-06-29       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Corrected score estimation in the proportional hazards model with misclassified discrete covariates.

Authors:  David M Zucker; Donna Spiegelman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Regression calibration in air pollution epidemiology with exposure estimated by spatio-temporal modeling.

Authors:  Donna Spiegelman
Journal:  Environmetrics       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 1.900

5.  Incorporating linked healthcare claims to improve confounding control in a study of in-hospital medication use.

Authors:  Jessica M Franklin; Wesley Eddings; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Jeremy A Rassen
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Structured measurement error in nutritional epidemiology: applications in the Pregnancy, Infection, and Nutrition (PIN) Study.

Authors:  Brent A Johnson; Amy H Herring; Joseph G Ibrahim; Anna Maria Siega-Riz
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.033

7.  The impact of gene-environment dependence and misclassification in genetic association studies incorporating gene-environment interactions.

Authors:  Sara Lindström; Yu-Chun Yen; Donna Spiegelman; Peter Kraft
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 0.444

8.  Estimation and inference for case-control studies with multiple non-gold standard exposure assessments: with an occupational health application.

Authors:  Haitao Chu; Stephen R Cole; Ying Wei; Joseph G Ibrahim
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 5.899

Review 9.  STRATOS guidance document on measurement error and misclassification of variables in observational epidemiology: Part 1-Basic theory and simple methods of adjustment.

Authors:  Ruth H Keogh; Pamela A Shaw; Paul Gustafson; Raymond J Carroll; Veronika Deffner; Kevin W Dodd; Helmut Küchenhoff; Janet A Tooze; Michael P Wallace; Victor Kipnis; Laurence S Freedman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Embedding Mobile Health Technology into the Nurses' Health Study 3 to Study Behavioral Risk Factors for Cancer.

Authors:  Ruby Fore; Jaime E Hart; Christine Choirat; Jennifer W Thompson; Kathleen Lynch; Francine Laden; Jorge E Chavarro; Peter James
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.