MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4392967216 · doi:10.1002/bimj.202200333

Pairwise fitting of piecewise mixed models for the joint modeling of multivariate longitudinal outcomes, in a randomized crossover trial

2024· article· en· W4392967216 sur OpenAlex
Moses Mwangi, Geert Molenberghs, Edmund Njeru Njagi, Samuel Mwalili, Roel Braekers, Alvaro J. Flórez, Susan Gachau, Zipporah Bukania, Geert Verbeke

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueBiometrical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMathematics
ThématiqueStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesInternational Development Research Centre
Mots-clésBivariate analysisStatisticsRandom effects modelMixed modelCausal inferencePairwise comparisonMultivariate statisticsPiecewiseCrossover studyRandomized controlled trialMathematicsEconometricsMedicineInternal medicineMeta-analysis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Many statistical models have been proposed in the literature for the analysis of longitudinal data. One may propose to model two or more correlated longitudinal processes simultaneously, with a goal of understanding their association over time. Joint modeling is then required to carefully study the association structure among the outcomes as well as drawing joint inferences about the different outcomes. In this study, we sought to model the associations among six nutrition outcomes while circumventing the computational challenge posed by their clustered and high‐dimensional nature. We analyzed data from a 2 2 randomized crossover trial conducted in Kenya, to compare the effect of high‐dose and low‐dose iodine in household salt on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in women of reproductive age and their household matching pair of school‐aged children. Two additional outcomes, namely, urinary iodine concentration (UIC) in women and children were measured repeatedly to monitor the amount of iodine excreted through urine. We extended the model proposed by Mwangi et al. (2021, Communications in Statistics: Case Studies, Data Analysis and Applications , 7 (3), 413–431) allowing flexible piecewise joint models for six outcomes to depend on separate random effects, which are themselves correlated. This entailed fitting 15 bivariate general linear mixed models and deriving inference for the joint model using pseudo‐likelihood theory. We analyzed the outcomes separately and jointly using piecewise linear mixed‐effects (PLME) model and further validated the results using current state‐of‐the‐art Jones and Kenward methodology (JKME model) used for analyzing randomized crossover trials. The results indicate that high‐dose iodine in salt significantly reduced blood pressure (BP) compared to low‐dose iodine in salt. Estimates for the random effects and residual error components showed that SBP and DBP had strong positive correlation, with effect of the random slope indicating that significantly related outcomes are strongly associated in their evolution. There was a moderately strong inverse relationship between evolutions of UIC and BP both in women and children. These findings confirmed the original hypothesis that high‐dose iodine salt has significant lowering effect on BP. We further sought to evaluate the performance of our proposed PLME model against the widely used JKME model, within the multivariate joint modeling framework through a simulation study mimicking a crossover design. From our findings, the multivariate joint PLME model performed exceptionally well both in estimation of random‐effects matrix (G) and Hessian matrix (H), allowing satisfactory model convergence during estimation. It allowed a more complex fit to the data with both random intercepts and slopes effects compared to the multivariate joint JKME model that allowed for random intercepts only. When a hierarchical viewpoint is adopted, in the sense that outcomes are specified conditionally upon random effects, the variance–covariance matrix of the random effects must be positive definite. In some cases, additional random effects could explain much variability in the data, thus improving precision in estimation of the estimands (effect size) parameters. The key highlight in this evaluation shows that multivariate joint JKME model is a powerful tool especially while fitting mixed models with random intercepts only, in crossover design settings. Addition of random slopes may lead to model complexities in most cases, resulting in unsatisfactory model convergence during estimation. To circumvent convergence pitfalls, extention of JKME model to PLME model allows a more flexible fit to the data (generated from crossover design settings), especially in the multivariate joint modeling framework.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,586
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,984

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,024
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,236
Tête enseignante GPT0,429
Écart entre enseignants0,192 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle