Pattern-mixture models with incomplete informative cluster size: Application to a repeated pregnancy study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chaurasia A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5844500 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Pattern-mixture models with incomplete informative cluster size: Application to a repeated pregnancy study.
Chaurasia Ashok A Liu Danping D Albert Paul S PS
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics 20170615 1
The incomplete informative cluster size problem is motivated by the NICHD Consecutive Pregnancies Study, aiming to study the relationship between pregnancy outcomes and parity. These pregnancy outcomes are potentially associated with the number of births over a woman's lifetime, resulting in an incomplete informative cluster size (censored at the end of the study window). We develop a pattern mixture model for informative cluster size by treating the lifetime number of births as a latent variabl ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:It is not uncommon in follow-up studies to make multiple attempts to collect a measurement after baseline. Recording whether these attempts are successful or not provides useful information for the purposes of assessing the missing at random (MAR) assumption and facilitating missing not at random (MNAR) modeling. This is because measurements from subjects who provide this data after multiple failed attempts may differ from those who provide the measurement after fewer attempts. This type of "continuum of resistance" to providing a measurement has hitherto been modeled in a selection model framework, where the outcome data is modeled jointly with the success or failure of the attempts given these outcomes. Here, we present a pattern mixture approach to model this type of data. We re-analyze the repeated attempt data from a trial that was previously analyzed using a selection model approach. Our pattern mixture model is more flexible and is more transparent in terms of parameter identifiability than the models that have previously been used to model repeated attempt data and allows for sensitivity analysis. We conclude that our approach to modeling this type of data provides a fully viable alternative to the more established selection model.
| S-EPMC4836559 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBioinformatics investigators often gain insights by combining information across multiple and disparate data sets. Merging data from multiple sources frequently results in data sets that are incomplete or contain missing values. Although missing data are ubiquitous, existing implementations of Gaussian mixture models (GMMs) either cannot accommodate missing data, or do so by imposing simplifying assumptions that limit the applicability of the model. In the presence of missing data, a standard ad hoc practice is to perform complete case analysis or imputation prior to model fitting. Both approaches have serious drawbacks, potentially resulting in biased and unstable parameter estimates.ResultsHere we present missingness-aware Gaussian mixture models (MGMM), an R package for fitting GMMs in the presence of missing data. Unlike existing GMM implementations that can accommodate missing data, MGMM places no restrictions on the form of the covariance matrix. Using three case studies on real and simulated 'omics data sets, we demonstrate that, when the underlying data distribution is near-to a GMM, MGMM is more effective at recovering the true cluster assignments than either the existing GMM implementations that accommodate missing data, or fitting a standard GMM after state of the art imputation. Moreover, MGMM provides an accurate assessment of cluster assignment uncertainty, even when the generative distribution is not a GMM.ConclusionCompared to state-of-the-art competitors, MGMM demonstrates a better ability to recover the true cluster assignments for a wide variety of data sets and a large range of missingness rates. MGMM provides the bioinformatics community with a powerful, easy-to-use, and statistically sound tool for performing clustering and density estimation in the presence of missing data. MGMM is publicly available as an R package on CRAN: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MGMM .
| S-EPMC9158227 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We extend a random pattern mixture joint model for longitudinal ordinal outcomes and informative dropouts. The patients are generalized to 'pattern' groups based on known covariates that are potentially surrogated for the severity of the underlying condition. The random pattern effects are defined as the latent effects linking the dropout process and the ordinal longitudinal outcome. Conditional on the random pattern effects, the longitudinal outcome and the dropout times are assumed independent. Estimates are obtained via the Expectation-maximization algorithm. We applied the model to the end-stage renal disease data. Anemia was found to be significantly affected by the baseline iron treatment when the dropout information was adjusted via the study model; as opposed to an independent or shared parameter model. Simulations were performed to evaluate the performance of the random pattern mixture model under various assumptions.
| S-EPMC4935089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clustered data commonly arise in epidemiology. We assume each cluster member has an outcome Y and covariates X. When there are missing data in Y, the distribution of Y given X in all cluster members ("complete clusters") may be different from the distribution just in members with observed Y ("observed clusters"). Often the former is of interest, but when data are missing because in a fundamental sense Y does not exist (e.g., quality of life for a person who has died), the latter may be more meaningful (quality of life conditional on being alive). Weighted and doubly weighted generalized estimating equations and shared random-effects models have been proposed for observed-cluster inference when cluster size is informative, that is, the distribution of Y given X in observed clusters depends on observed cluster size. We show these methods can be seen as actually giving inference for complete clusters and may not also give observed-cluster inference. This is true even if observed clusters are complete in themselves rather than being the observed part of larger complete clusters: here methods may describe imaginary complete clusters rather than the observed clusters. We show under which conditions shared random-effects models proposed for observed-cluster inference do actually describe members with observed Y. A psoriatic arthritis dataset is used to illustrate the danger of misinterpreting estimates from shared random-effects models.
| S-EPMC4312901 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundRecent work has shown that cluster-randomised trials can estimate two distinct estimands: the participant-average and cluster-average treatment effects. These can differ when participant outcomes or the treatment effect depends on the cluster size (termed informative cluster size). In this case, estimators that target one estimand (such as the analysis of unweighted cluster-level summaries, which targets the cluster-average effect) may be biased for the other. Furthermore, commonly used estimators such as mixed-effects models or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure can be biased for both estimands. However, there has been little empirical research into whether informative cluster size is likely to occur in practice.MethodWe re-analysed a cluster-randomised trial comparing two different thresholds for red blood cell transfusion in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding to explore whether estimates for the participant- and cluster-average effects differed, to provide empirical evidence for whether informative cluster size may be present. For each outcome, we first estimated a participant-average effect using independence estimating equations, which are unbiased under informative cluster size. We then compared this to two further methods: (1) a cluster-average effect estimated using either weighted independence estimating equations or unweighted cluster-level summaries, and (2) estimates from a mixed-effects model or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure. We then performed a small simulation study to evaluate whether observed differences between cluster- and participant-average estimates were likely to occur even if no informative cluster size was present.ResultsFor most outcomes, treatment effect estimates from different methods were similar. However, differences of >10% occurred between participant- and cluster-average estimates for 5 of 17 outcomes (29%). We also observed several notable differences between estimates from mixed-effects models or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure and those based on independence estimating equations. For example, for the EQ-5D VAS score, the independence estimating equation estimate of the participant-average difference was 4.15 (95% confidence interval: -3.37 to 11.66), compared with 2.84 (95% confidence interval: -7.37 to 13.04) for the cluster-average independence estimating equation estimate, and 3.23 (95% confidence interval: -6.70 to 13.16) from a mixed-effects model. Similarly, for thromboembolic/ischaemic events, the independence estimating equation estimate for the participant-average odds ratio was 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.07 to 2.48), compared with 0.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 1.77) from the cluster-average estimator.ConclusionIn this re-analysis, we found that estimates from the various approaches could differ, which may be due to the presence of informative cluster size. Careful consideration of the estimand and the plausibility of assumptions underpinning each estimator can help ensure an appropriate analysis methods are used. Independence estimating equations and the analysis of cluster-level summaries (with appropriate weighting for each to correspond to either the participant-average or cluster-average treatment effect) are a desirable choice when informative cluster size is deemed possible, due to their unbiasedness in this setting.
| S-EPMC10638852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clustered data are often encountered in biomedical studies, and to date, a number of approaches have been proposed to analyze such data. However, the phenomenon of informative cluster size (ICS) is a challenging problem, and its presence has an impact on the choice of a correct analysis methodology. For example, Dutta and Datta (2015, Biometrics) presented a number of marginal distributions that could be tested. Depending on the nature and degree of informativeness of the cluster size, these marginal distributions may differ, as do the choices of the appropriate test. In particular, they applied their new test to a periodontal data set where the plausibility of the informativeness was mentioned, but no formal test for the same was conducted. We propose bootstrap tests for testing the presence of ICS. A balanced bootstrap method is developed to successfully estimate the null distribution by merging the re-sampled observations with closely matching counterparts. Relying on the assumption of exchangeability within clusters, the proposed procedure performs well in simulations even with a small number of clusters, at different distributions and against different alternative hypotheses, thus making it an omnibus test. We also explain how to extend the ICS test to a regression setting and thereby enhancing its practical utility. The methodologies are illustrated using the periodontal data set mentioned earlier. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
| S-EPMC5461221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The issue of informative cluster size (ICS) often arises in the analysis of dental data. ICS describes a situation where the outcome of interest is related to cluster size. Much of the work on modeling marginal inference in longitudinal studies with potential ICS has focused on continuous outcomes. However, periodontal disease outcomes, including clinical attachment loss, are often assessed using ordinal scoring systems. In addition, participants may lose teeth over the course of the study due to advancing disease status. Here we develop longitudinal cluster-weighted generalized estimating equations (CWGEE) to model the association of ordinal clustered longitudinal outcomes with participant-level health-related covariates, including metabolic syndrome and smoking status, and potentially decreasing cluster size due to tooth-loss, by fitting a proportional odds logistic regression model. The within-teeth correlation coefficient over time is estimated using the two-stage quasi-least squares method. The motivation for our work stems from the Department of Veterans Affairs Dental Longitudinal Study in which participants regularly received general and oral health examinations. In an extensive simulation study, we compare results obtained from CWGEE with various working correlation structures to those obtained from conventional GEE which does not account for ICS. Our proposed method yields results with very low bias and excellent coverage probability in contrast to a conventional generalized estimating equations approach.
| S-EPMC6838778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pattern mixture modeling is a popular approach for handling incomplete longitudinal data. Such models are not identifiable by construction. Identifying restrictions is one approach to mixture model identification (Little, 1995, Journal of the American Statistical Association?90, 1112-1121; Little and Wang, 1996, Biometrics?52, 98-111; Thijs et al., 2002, Biostatistics?3, 245-265; Kenward, Molenberghs, and Thijs, 2003, Biometrika?90, 53-71; Daniels and Hogan, 2008, in Missing Data in Longitudinal Studies: Strategies for Bayesian Modeling and Sensitivity Analysis) and is a natural starting point for missing not at random sensitivity analysis (Thijs et al., 2002, Biostatistics?3, 245-265; Daniels and Hogan, 2008, in Missing Data in Longitudinal Studies: Strategies for Bayesian Modeling and Sensitivity Analysis). However, when the pattern specific models are multivariate normal, identifying restrictions corresponding to missing at random (MAR) may not exist. Furthermore, identification strategies can be problematic in models with covariates (e.g., baseline covariates with time-invariant coefficients). In this article, we explore conditions necessary for identifying restrictions that result in MAR to exist under a multivariate normality assumption and strategies for identifying sensitivity parameters for sensitivity analysis or for a fully Bayesian analysis with informative priors. In addition, we propose alternative modeling and sensitivity analysis strategies under a less restrictive assumption for the distribution of the observed response data. We adopt the deviance information criterion for model comparison and perform a simulation study to evaluate the performances of the different modeling approaches. We also apply the methods to a longitudinal clinical trial. Problems caused by baseline covariates with time-invariant coefficients are investigated and an alternative identifying restriction based on residuals is proposed as a solution.
| S-EPMC3136648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClustered data arise in research when patients are clustered within larger units. Generalised Estimating Equations (GEE) and Generalised Linear Models (GLMM) can be used to provide marginal and cluster-specific inference and predictions, respectively.MethodsConfounding by Cluster (CBC) and Informative cluster size (ICS) are two complications that may arise when modelling clustered data. CBC can arise when the distribution of a predictor variable (termed 'exposure'), varies between clusters causing confounding of the exposure-outcome relationship. ICS means that the cluster size conditional on covariates is not independent of the outcome. In both situations, standard GEE and GLMM may provide biased or misleading inference, and modifications have been proposed. However, both CBC and ICS are routinely overlooked in the context of risk prediction, and their impact on the predictive ability of the models has been little explored. We study the effect of CBC and ICS on the predictive ability of risk models for binary outcomes when GEE and GLMM are used. We examine whether two simple approaches to handle CBC and ICS, which involve adjusting for the cluster mean of the exposure and the cluster size, respectively, can improve the accuracy of predictions.ResultsBoth CBC and ICS can be viewed as violations of the assumptions in the standard GLMM; the random effects are correlated with exposure for CBC and cluster size for ICS. Based on these principles, we simulated data subject to CBC/ICS. The simulation studies suggested that the predictive ability of models derived from using standard GLMM and GEE ignoring CBC/ICS was affected. Marginal predictions were found to be mis-calibrated. Adjusting for the cluster-mean of the exposure or the cluster size improved calibration, discrimination and the overall predictive accuracy of marginal predictions, by explaining part of the between cluster variability. The presence of CBC/ICS did not affect the accuracy of conditional predictions. We illustrate these concepts using real data from a multicentre study with potential CBC.ConclusionIgnoring CBC and ICS when developing prediction models for clustered data can affect the accuracy of marginal predictions. Adjusting for the cluster mean of the exposure or the cluster size can improve the predictive accuracy of marginal predictions.
| S-EPMC8254921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the analysis of clustered data, inverse cluster size weighting has been shown to be resistant to the potentially biasing effects of informative cluster size, where the number of observations within a cluster is associated with the outcome variable of interest. The method of inverse cluster size reweighting has been implemented to establish clustered data analogues of common tests for independent data, but the method has yet to be extended to tests of categorical data. Many variance estimators have been implemented across established cluster-weighted tests, but potential effects of differing methods on test performance has not previously been explored. Here, we develop cluster-weighted estimators of marginal proportions that remain unbiased under informativeness, and derive analogues of three popular tests for clustered categorical data, the one-sample proportion, goodness of fit, and independence chi square tests. We construct these tests using several variance estimators and show substantial differences in the performance of cluster-weighted tests based on variance estimation technique, with variance estimators constructed under the null hypothesis maintaining size closest to nominal. We illustrate the proposed tests through an application to a data set of functional measures from patients with spinal cord injuries participating in a rehabilitation program.
| S-EPMC11220780 | biostudies-literature