MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006070241 · doi:10.2147/oams.s33060

Comparison of various modeling approaches in the analysis of longitudinal data with a binary outcome: The Ontario Mother and Infant Study (TOMIS) III

2012· article· en· W2006070241 on OpenAlex
Lehana Thabane, Foster, Sword, Krueger, Kurtz Landy, Watt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Medical Statistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGeePostpartum depressionBiostatisticsGeneralized estimating equationLongitudinal studyMultilevel modelLongitudinal dataPsychologyStatisticsGerontologyDemographyMedicineMathematicsPublic healthSociologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Longitudinal studies are often used to investigate the developmental trends of outcomes over time. Several modeling strategies can be applied for the analyses of longitudinal data. In this study, various statistical approaches were discussed and compared using data from The Ontario Mother and Infant Study (TOMIS) III. TOMIS III was a longitudinal cohort study that assessed the associations between the method of delivery and health outcomes and service utilizations. The primary outcome of postpartum depression was used as an example. Methods: Generalized estimating equations (GEE) assuming a serial correlation structure were used as the primary method of analysis to assess the association between the method of delivery and postpartum depression over 12 months. We performed sensitivity analyses using three other methods – namely, the (1) generalized linear mixed-effects model (GLMM), (2) hierarchical generalized linear model (HGLM), and (3) Bayesian hierarchical model (BHM), to compare the robustness of the results. Results: The results from all four models indicated that the method of delivery had no significant effect on postpartum depression. However, GEE, GLMM, and BHM identified the following seven predictors of depression: annual household income; urinary incontinence (bladder problems); English or French (Canada's official languages) spoken at home; a lower SF-12 mental component score; unmet learning needs in the hospital; lower social support; and a lower SF-12 physical component score. HGLM showed similar results to the above three models with the exception of language spoken at home, which was not significant. GEE provided the good fit statistics for the data. Conclusion: Method of delivery had no significant effect on postpartum depression, based on GEE analysis. This result remained robust under different methods of analyses. GEE demonstrated a good fit for the TOMIS III data. Keywords: longitudinal data, generalized estimating equations, hierarchical model, TOMIS

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.509
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.031 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it