MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413017155 · doi:10.22215/etd/2025-16510

Analysis Of Longitudinal Data With Nonignorable Missing Responses And Measurement Errors In Covariates

2025· dissertation· en· W4413017155 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ali Daher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariateMissing dataLongitudinal dataStatisticsPsychologyComputer scienceEconometricsMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a comprehensive exploration of linear mixed models that incorporate measurement errors in specific covariates for longitudinal data with non-ignorable and non-monotone missing responses. The primary objective is to estimate mean response parameters and variance components utilizing a combined methodology of Regression Calibration (RC) and Monte Carlo EM. The investigation begins with an in-depth examination of the RC method applied to linear mixed models, particularly its adaptation to longitudinal data with covariates affected by measurement errors. A thorough simulation study is conducted, involving various mean response functions, revealing that the RC method produces unbiased and efficient estimators in scenarios where the true underlying model includes covariates with measurement errors. Subsequently, linear mixed models are introduced for longitudinal data with non-ignorable missing responses. The thesis proposes a semi-parametric Monte Carlo EM algorithm for the simultaneous estimation of regression parameters and variance components in linear mixed models with non-ignorable and non-monotone missing responses, combining the Monte Carlo EM algorithm of Ibrahim et al. and the RC method. The simulation study demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed method, even in the presence of a substantial proportion of non-ignorable missing responses. The thesis concludes with an application of the proposed RC-MCEM method to actual longitudinal data from the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), focusing on individuals with alcoholism and exploring how measurement errors in certain covariates can introduce biases in parameter estimation. The complexity of the problem is further elucidated when missingness occurs in the response variable.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.272
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207