Literature DB >> 18810610

Comparison of proportional and differential odds models for mixed-effects analysis of categorical data.

Maria C Kjellsson1, Per-Henrik Zingmark, E Niclas Jonsson, Mats O Karlsson.   

Abstract

In this work a model for analyzing categorical data is presented; the differential odds model. Unlike the commonly used proportional odds model, this model does not assume that a covariate affects all categories equally on the log odds scale. The differential odds model was compared to the proportional odds model, by assessing statistical significance and improvement of predictive performance when applying the differential odds model to data previously analyzed using the proportional odds model. Three clinical studies; 3-category T-cell receptor density data, 5-category diarrhea data and 6-category sedation data, were re-analyzed with the differential odds model. As expected, no improvements were seen with T-cell receptor density and diarrhea data. However, for the more complex measurement sedation, the differential odds model provided both statistical improvements and improvements in simulation properties. The estimated actual critical value was for all data lower than the nominal value, using the number of added parameters as the degree of freedom, i.e. the differential odds model is statistically indicated to a less extent than expected. The differential odds model had the desired property of not being indicated when not necessary, but it may provide improvements when the data does not represent a categorization of continuous data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18810610     DOI: 10.1007/s10928-008-9098-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn        ISSN: 1567-567X            Impact factor:   2.745


  20 in total

1.  Cumulative logit models for ordinal data: a case study involving allergic rhinitis severity scores.

Authors:  D J Lunn; J Wakefield; A Racine-Poon
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Assessment of type I error rates for the statistical sub-model in NONMEM.

Authors:  Ulrika Wählby; M René Bouw; E Niclas Jonsson; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of propofol for long-term sedation in critically ill patients: a comparison between propofol 6% and propofol 1%.

Authors:  Catherijne A J Knibbe; Klaas P Zuideveld; Joost DeJongh; Paul F M Kuks; Leon P H J Aarts; Meindert Danhof
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 6.875

4.  Use of prior information to stabilize a population data analysis.

Authors:  Per O Gisleskog; Mats O Karlsson; Stuart L Beal
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Statistical assessment of ordinal outcomes in comparative studies.

Authors:  S C Scott; M S Goldberg; N E Mayo
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Ordinal regression models for epidemiologic data.

Authors:  B G Armstrong; M Sloan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Pharmacokinetics of ximelagatran and relationship to clinical response in acute deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Marie Cullberg; Ulf G Eriksson; Karin Wåhlander; Henry Eriksson; Sam Schulman; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Population pharmacodynamic model for ketorolac analgesia.

Authors:  J W Mandema; D R Stanski
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 6.875

9.  Alfentanil and placebo analgesia: no sex differences detected in models of experimental pain.

Authors:  Erik Olofsen; Raymonda Romberg; Hans Bijl; René Mooren; Frank Engbers; Benjamin Kest; Albert Dahan
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 7.892

10.  A new approach to the analysis of analgesic drug trials, illustrated with bromfenac data.

Authors:  L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 6.875

View more
  11 in total

1.  Implementation and evaluation of the SAEM algorithm for longitudinal ordered categorical data with an illustration in pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics.

Authors:  Radojka M Savic; France Mentré; Marc Lavielle
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 4.009

2.  A Minimal Continuous-Time Markov Pharmacometric Model.

Authors:  Emilie Schindler; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 4.009

3.  Application of Item Response Theory to Modeling of Expanded Disability Status Scale in Multiple Sclerosis.

Authors:  A M Novakovic; E H J Krekels; A Munafo; S Ueckert; M O Karlsson
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  Item Response Theory as an Efficient Tool to Describe a Heterogeneous Clinical Rating Scale in De Novo Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease Patients.

Authors:  Simon Buatois; Sylvie Retout; Nicolas Frey; Sebastian Ueckert
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Application of Item Response Theory to Model Disease Progression and Agomelatine Effect in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

Authors:  Marc Cerou; Sophie Peigné; Emmanuelle Comets; Marylore Chenel
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 6.  Association of STAT4 gene rs7574865G > T polymorphism with ulcerative colitis risk: evidence from 1532 cases and 3786 controls.

Authors:  Ling Xu; Wei-Qi Dai; Fan Wang; Lei He; Ying-Qun Zhou; Jie Lu; Xuan-Fu Xu; Chuan-Yong Guo
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 3.318

7.  Improved utilization of ADAS-cog assessment data through item response theory based pharmacometric modeling.

Authors:  Sebastian Ueckert; Elodie L Plan; Kaori Ito; Mats O Karlsson; Brian Corrigan; Andrew C Hooker
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 4.200

8.  Projected 24-hour post-dose ocular itching scores post-treatment with olopatadine 0.7% versus 0.2.

Authors:  Matthew L Fidler; Abayomi Ogundele; David Covert; Ramesh Sarangapani
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2018-04-21       Impact factor: 2.745

9.  Population pharmacodynamic modelling of midazolam induced sedation in terminally ill adult patients.

Authors:  Linda G Franken; Brenda C M de Winter; Anniek D Masman; Monique van Dijk; Frans P M Baar; Dick Tibboel; Birgit C P Koch; Teun van Gelder; Ron A A Mathot
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 4.335

10.  Sweet/Fat Preference Taste in Subjects Who are Lean, Obese and Very Obese.

Authors:  Jennifer Leohr; Maria C Kjellsson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 4.200

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.