Random effects model

About: Random effects model is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 8388 publications have been published within this topic receiving 438823 citations. The topic is also known as: random effects & random effect.

Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects.

Abstract: Earlier work showed how to perform fixed-effects meta-analysis of studies or trials when each provides results on more than one outcome per patient and these multiple outcomes are correlated. That fixed-effects generalized-least-squares approach analyzes the multiple outcomes jointly within a single model, and it can include covariates, such as duration of therapy or quality of trial, that may explain observed heterogeneity of results among the trials. Sometimes the covariates explain all the heterogeneity, and the fixed-effects regression model is appropriate. However, unexplained heterogeneity may often remain, even after taking into account known or suspected covariates. Because fixed-effects models do not make allowance for this remaining unexplained heterogeneity, the potential exists for bias in estimated coefficients, standard errors and p-values. We propose two random-effects approaches for the regression meta-analysis of multiple correlated outcomes. We compare their use with fixed-effects models and with separate-outcomes models in a meta-analysis of periodontal clinical trials. A simulation study shows the advantages of the random-effects approach. These methods also facilitate meta-analysis of trials that compare more than two treatments.

An intuitive Bayesian spatial model for disease mapping that accounts for scaling

Abstract: In recent years, disease mapping studies have become a routine application within geographical epidemiology and are typically analysed within a Bayesian hierarchical model formulation. A variety of model formulations for the latent level have been proposed but all come with inherent issues. In the classical BYM (Besag, York and Mollie) model, the spatially structured component cannot be seen independently from the unstructured component. This makes prior definitions for the hyperparameters of the two random effects challenging. There are alternative model formulations that address this confounding; however, the issue on how to choose interpretable hyperpriors is still unsolved. Here, we discuss a recently proposed parameterisation of the BYM model that leads to improved parameter control as the hyperparameters can be seen independently from each other. Furthermore, the need for a scaled spatial component is addressed, which facilitates assignment of interpretable hyperpriors and make these transferable between spatial applications with different graph structures. The hyperparameters themselves are used to define flexible extensions of simple base models. Consequently, penalised complexity priors for these parameters can be derived based on the information-theoretic distance from the flexible model to the base model, giving priors with clear interpretation. We provide implementation details for the new model formulation which preserve sparsity properties, and we investigate systematically the model performance and compare it to existing parameterisations. Through a simulation study, we show that the new model performs well, both showing good learning abilities and good shrinkage behaviour. In terms of model choice criteria, the proposed model performs at least equally well as existing parameterisations, but only the new formulation offers parameters that are interpretable and hyperpriors that have a clear meaning.

Estimating Efficiencies from Frontier Models with Panel Data: A Comparison of Parametric, Non-Parametric and Semi-Parametric Methods with Bootstrapping

Abstract: The aim of this article is first to review how the standard econometric methods for panel data may be adapted to the problem of estimating frontier models and (in)efficiencies. The aim is to clarify the difference between the fixed and random effect model and to stress the advantages of the latter. Then a semi-parametric method is proposed (using a non-parametric method as a first step), the message being that in order to estimate frontier models and (in)efficiences with panel data, it is an appealing method. Since analytic sampling distributions of efficiencies are not available, a bootstrap method is presented in this framework. This provides a tool allowing to assess the statistical significance of the obtained estimators. All the methods are illustrated in the problem of estimating the inefficiencies of 19 railway companies observed over a period of 14 years (1970–1983).

The Random Effects in Multilevel Models: Getting Them Wrong and Getting Them Right

Abstract: Many surveys of respondents from multiple countries or subnational regions have now been fielded on multiple occasions. Social scientists are regularly using multilevel models to analyse the data generated by such surveys, investigating variation across both space and time. We show, however, that such models are usually specified erroneously. They typically omit one or more relevant random effects, thereby ignoring important clustering in the data, which leads to downward biases in the standard errors. These biases occur even if the fixed effects are specified correctly; if the fixed effects are incorrect, erroneous specification of the random effects worsens biases in the coefficients. We illustrate these problems using Monte Carlo simulations and two empirical examples. Our recommendation to researchers fitting multilevel models to comparative longitudinal survey data is to include random effects at all potentially relevant levels, thereby avoiding any mismatch between the random and fixed parts of their models.