MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075875797 · doi:10.1002/sim.6198

Small sample GEE estimation of regression parameters for longitudinal data

2014· article· en· W2075875797 on OpenAlexafffund
S. R. Paul, Xuemao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStatisticsGeneralized estimating equationEstimatorMathematicsMarginal modelSample size determinationEstimating equationsRegressionRegression analysisGeeConfidence intervalStandard errorEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Longitudinal (clustered) response data arise in many bio-statistical applications which, in general, cannot be assumed to be independent. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) is a widely used method to estimate marginal regression parameters for correlated responses. The advantage of the GEE is that the estimates of the regression parameters are asymptotically unbiased even if the correlation structure is misspecified, although their small sample properties are not known. In this paper, two bias adjusted GEE estimators of the regression parameters in longitudinal data are obtained when the number of subjects is small. One is based on a bias correction, and the other is based on a bias reduction. Simulations show that the performances of both the bias-corrected methods are similar in terms of bias, efficiency, coverage probability, average coverage length, impact of misspecification of correlation structure, and impact of cluster size on bias correction. Both these methods show superior properties over the GEE estimates for small samples. Further, analysis of data involving a small number of subjects also shows improvement in bias, MSE, standard error, and length of the confidence interval of the estimates by the two bias adjusted methods over the GEE estimates. For small to moderate sample sizes (N ≤50), either of the bias-corrected methods GEEBc and GEEBr can be used. However, the method GEEBc should be preferred over GEEBr, as the former is computationally easier. For large sample sizes, the GEE method can be used.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207