4.2 Article

Logistic Regression With Multiple Random Effects: A Simulation Study of Estimation Methods and Statistical Packages

Journal

AMERICAN STATISTICIAN
Volume 67, Issue 3, Pages 171-182

Publisher

AMER STATISTICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2013.817357

Keywords

Adaptive Gauss-Hermite integration; Antismoking advertising; Laplace approximation; Mixed-effects logistic regression; Penalized quasi-likelihood

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [CA123444, CA154254]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several statistical packages are capable of estimating generalized linear mixed models and these packages provide one or more of three estimation methods: penalized quasi-likelihood, Laplace, and Gauss-Hermite. Many studies have investigated these methods' performance for the mixed-effects logistic regression model. However, the authors focused on models with one or two random effects and assumed a simple covariance structure between them, which may not be realistic. When there are multiple correlated random effects in a model, the computation becomes intensive, and often an algorithm fails to converge. Moreover, in our analysis of smoking status and exposure to antitobacco advertisements, we have observed that when a model included multiple random effects, parameter estimates varied considerably from one statistical package to another even when using the same estimation method. This article presents a comprehensive review of the advantages and disadvantages of each estimation method. In addition, we compare the performances of the three methods across statistical packages via simulation, which involves two- and three-level logistic regression models with at least three correlated random effects. We apply our findings to a real dataset. Our results suggest that two packages-SAS GLIMMIX Laplace and Super Mix Gaussian quadrature-perform well in terms of accuracy, precision, convergence rates, and computing speed. We also discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the two packages in regard to sample sizes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available