Literature DB >> 12229997

Parameter estimation in longitudinal studies with outcome-dependent follow-up.

Stuart R Lipsitz1, Garrett M Fitzmaurice, Joseph G Ibrahim, Richard Gelber, Steven Lipshultz.   

Abstract

In many observational studies, individuals are measured repeatedly over time, although not necessarily at a set of prespecified occasions. Instead, individuals may be measured at irregular intervals, with those having a history of poorer health outcomes being measured with somewhat greater frequency and regularity; i.e., those individuals with poorer health outcomes may have more frequent follow-up measurements and the intervals between their repeated measurements may be shorter. In this article, we consider estimation of regression parameters in models for longitudinal data where the follow-up times are not fixed by design but can depend on previous outcomes. In particular, we focus on general linear models for longitudinal data where the repeated measures are assumed to have a multivariate Gaussian distribution. We consider assumptions regarding the follow-up time process that result in the likelihood function separating into two components: one for the follow-up time process, the other for the outcome process. The practical implication of this separation is that the former process can be ignored when making likelihood-based inferences about the latter; i.e., maximum likelihood (ML) estimation of the regression parameters relating the mean of the longitudinal outcomes to covariates does not require that a model for the distribution of follow-up times be specified. As a result, standard statistical software, e.g., SAS PROC MIXED (Littell et al., 1996, SAS System for Mixed Models), can be used to analyze the data. However, we also demonstrate that misspecification of the model for the covariance among the repeated measures will, in general, result in regression parameter estimates that are biased. Furthermore, results of a simulation study indicate that the potential bias due to misspecification of the covariance can be quite considerable in this setting. Finally, we illustrate these results using data from a longitudinal observational study (Lipshultz et al., 1995, New England Journal of Medicine 332, 1738-1743) that explored the cardiotoxic effects of doxorubicin chemotherapy for the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12229997     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2002.00621.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  26 in total

1.  Semiparametric analysis of panel count data with correlated observation and follow-up times.

Authors:  Xin He; Xingwei Tong; Jianguo Sun
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 1.588

2.  Longitudinal Studies With Outcome-Dependent Follow-up: Models and Bayesian Regression.

Authors:  Duchwan Ryu; Debajyoti Sinha; Bani Mallick; S L Lipsitz; S Lipshultz
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.033

3.  Changes in cardiac biomarkers during doxorubicin treatment of pediatric patients with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: associations with long-term echocardiographic outcomes.

Authors:  Steven E Lipshultz; Tracie L Miller; Rebecca E Scully; Stuart R Lipsitz; Nader Rifai; Lewis B Silverman; Steven D Colan; Donna S Neuberg; Suzanne E Dahlberg; Jacqueline M Henkel; Barbara L Asselin; Uma H Athale; Luis A Clavell; Caroline Laverdière; Bruno Michon; Marshall A Schorin; Stephen E Sallan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Analyses of longitudinal, hospital clinical laboratory data with application to blood glucose concentrations.

Authors:  Jonathan S Schildcrout; Sebastien Haneuse; Josh F Peterson; Joshua C Denny; Michael E Matheny; Lemuel R Waitman; Randolph A Miller
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Surgical Coaching for Operative Performance Enhancement (SCOPE): skill ratings and impact on surgeons' practice.

Authors:  Jason C Pradarelli; Steven Yule; Stuart R Lipsitz; Nikhil Panda; Molly Craig; Kurt W Lowery; Stanley W Ashley; Denise W Gee; Peter M Waters; Jim Knight; Douglas S Smink
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Semiparametric Random Effects Models for Longitudinal Data with Informative Observation Times.

Authors:  Yang Li; Yanqing Sun
Journal:  Stat Interface       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 0.582

7.  Regression analysis of longitudinal data with outcome-dependent sampling and informative censoring.

Authors:  Weining Shen; Suyu Liu; Yong Chen; Jing Ning
Journal:  Scand Stat Theory Appl       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 1.396

8.  Bayesian semiparametric regression for longitudinal binary processes with missing data.

Authors:  Li Su; Joseph W Hogan
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  BIASED SAMPLING DESIGNS TO IMPROVE RESEARCH EFFICIENCY: FACTORS INFLUENCING PULMONARY FUNCTION OVER TIME IN CHILDREN WITH ASTHMA.

Authors:  Jonathan S Schildcrout; Paul J Rathouz; Leila R Zelnick; Shawn P Garbett; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.083

10.  Marginal mark regression analysis of recurrent marked point process data.

Authors:  Benjamin French; Patrick J Heagerty
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.