These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of generalized linear mixed model procedures with estimating equations for variance and covariance parameter estimation in longitudinal studies and group randomized trials.
    Author: Evans BA, Feng Z, Peterson AV.
    Journal: Stat Med; 2001 Nov 30; 20(22):3353-73. PubMed ID: 11746323.
    Abstract:
    Response data in longitudinal studies and group randomized trials are gathered on units that belong to clusters, within which data are usually positively correlated. Therefore, estimates and confidence intervals for intraclass correlation or variance components are helpful when designing a longitudinal study or group randomized trial. Data simulated from both study designs are used to investigate the estimation of variance and covariance parameters from the following procedures: for continuous outcomes, restricted maximum likelihood (REML) and estimating equations (EE); for binary outcomes, restricted pseudo-likelihood (REPL) and estimating equations (EE). We evaluate these procedures to see which provide valid and precise estimates as well as correct standard errors for the intraclass correlation coefficient or variance components. REML seems the better choice for estimating terms related to correlation for models with normal outcomes, especially in group randomized trial situations. Results for REML and EE are mixed when outcomes are continuous and non-normal. With binary outcomes neither REPL nor EE provides satisfactory estimation or inference in longitudinal study situations, while REPL is preferable for group randomized trials.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]