Literature DB >> 27802068

Estimation Methods for Mixed Logistic Models with Few Clusters.

Daniel McNeish1.   

Abstract

For mixed models generally, it is well known that modeling data with few clusters will result in biased estimates, particularly of the variance components and fixed effect standard errors. In linear mixed models, small sample bias is typically addressed through restricted maximum likelihood estimation (REML) and a Kenward-Roger correction. Yet with binary outcomes, there is no direct analog of either procedure. With a larger number of clusters, estimation methods for binary outcomes that approximate the likelihood to circumvent the lack of a closed form solution such as adaptive Gaussian quadrature and the Laplace approximation have been shown to yield less-biased estimates than linearization estimation methods that instead linearly approximate the model. However, adaptive Gaussian quadrature and the Laplace approximation are approximating the full likelihood rather than the restricted likelihood; the full likelihood is known to yield biased estimates with few clusters. On the other hand, linearization methods linearly approximate the model, which allows for restricted maximum likelihood and the Kenward-Roger correction to be applied. Thus, the following question arises: Which is preferable, a better approximation of a biased function or a worse approximation of an unbiased function? We address this question with a simulation and an illustrative empirical analysis.

Keywords:  Mutilevel logistic regression; hierarchical generalized linear model; small sample

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27802068     DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2016.1236237

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res        ISSN: 0027-3171            Impact factor:   5.923


  5 in total

1.  Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry (OCWAA) consortium: a resource of harmonized data from eight epidemiologic studies of African American and white women.

Authors:  Joellen M Schildkraut; Lauren C Peres; Traci N Bethea; Fabian Camacho; Deanna Chyn; Emily K Cloyd; Elisa V Bandera; Alicia Beeghly-Fadiel; Loren Lipworth; Charlotte E Joslin; Faith G Davis; Patricia G Moorman; Evan Myers; Heather M Ochs-Balcom; Veronica Wendy Setiawan; Malcolm C Pike; Anna H Wu; Lynn Rosenberg
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 2.  Report Quality of Generalized Linear Mixed Models in Psychology: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Roser Bono; Rafael Alarcón; María J Blanca
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-04-22

3.  Visual Perception of Photographs of Rotated 3D Objects in Goldfish (Carassius auratus).

Authors:  Jessica J Wegman; Evan Morrison; Kenneth Tyler Wilcox; Caroline M DeLong
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 3.231

4.  Individual participant data meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: A comparison of approaches for specifying and estimating one-stage models.

Authors:  Amardeep Legha; Richard D Riley; Joie Ensor; Kym I E Snell; Tim P Morris; Danielle L Burke
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Effect of enhancing audit and feedback on uptake of childhood pneumonia treatment policy in hospitals that are part of a clinical network: a cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Philip Ayieko; Grace Irimu; Morris Ogero; Paul Mwaniki; Lucas Malla; Thomas Julius; Mercy Chepkirui; George Mbevi; Jacquie Oliwa; Ambrose Agweyu; Samuel Akech; Fred Were; Mike English
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 7.960

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.