MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185570897 · doi:10.1515/ijb-2015-0026

Effect of Smoothing in Generalized Linear Mixed Models on the Estimation of Covariance Parameters for Longitudinal Data

2015· article· en· W2185570897 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Abu Shadeque Mullah, Andrea Benedetti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Biostatistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsSmoothingGeneralized estimating equationCovarianceCovariateVariance functionGeneralized linear modelSemiparametric regressionGeneralized linear mixed modelBinary dataPoisson distributionEstimatorVariance (accounting)Binary number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Besides being mainly used for analyzing clustered or longitudinal data, generalized linear mixed models can also be used for smoothing via restricting changes in the fit at the knots in regression splines. The resulting models are usually called semiparametric mixed models (SPMMs). We investigate the effect of smoothing using SPMMs on the correlation and variance parameter estimates for serially correlated longitudinal normal, Poisson and binary data. Through simulations, we compare the performance of SPMMs to other simpler methods for estimating the nonlinear association such as fractional polynomials, and using a parametric nonlinear function. Simulation results suggest that, in general, the SPMMs recover the true curves very well and yield reasonable estimates of the correlation and variance parameters. However, for binary outcomes, SPMMs produce biased estimates of the variance parameters for high serially correlated data. We apply these methods to a dataset investigating the association between CD4 cell count and time since seroconversion for HIV infected men enrolled in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.150
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.433
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1500.433
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.127 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of BiostatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207