Measures of clustering and heterogeneity in multilevel <scp>P</scp>oisson regression analyses of rates/count data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multilevel data occur frequently in many research areas like health services research and epidemiology. A suitable way to analyze such data is through the use of multilevel regression models. These models incorporate cluster-specific random effects that allow one to partition the total variation in the outcome into between-cluster variation and between-individual variation. The magnitude of the effect of clustering provides a measure of the general contextual effect. When outcomes are binary or time-to-event in nature, the general contextual effect can be quantified by measures of heterogeneity like the median odds ratio or the median hazard ratio, respectively, which can be calculated from a multilevel regression model. Outcomes that are integer counts denoting the number of times that an event occurred are common in epidemiological and medical research. The median (incidence) rate ratio in multilevel Poisson regression for counts that corresponds to the median odds ratio or median hazard ratio for binary or time-to-event outcomes respectively is relatively unknown and is rarely used. The median rate ratio is the median relative change in the rate of the occurrence of the event when comparing identical subjects from 2 randomly selected different clusters that are ordered by rate. We also describe how the variance partition coefficient, which denotes the proportion of the variation in the outcome that is attributable to between-cluster differences, can be computed with count outcomes. We illustrate the application and interpretation of these measures in a case study analyzing the rate of hospital readmission in patients discharged from hospital with a diagnosis of heart failure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.171 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".