Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20948974›Full record

ArticleComputational statistics & data analysis2011

Generalized Additive Models and Inflated Type I Error Rates of Smoother Significance Tests.

Robin L Young, Janice Weinberg, Verónica Vieira, Al Ozonoff, Thomas F Webster

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational statistics & data analysis, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Association of Dietary Niacin Intake With Incident Hip Fracture, BMD, and Body Composition: The Cardiovascular Health Study.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2019
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Spatial analyses of ALS incidence in Denmark over three decades.Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Fibrosis markers, hip fracture risk, and bone density in older adults.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016
    Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Robin L YoungDepartment of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Janice Weinberg
Verónica Vieira
Al Ozonoff
Thomas F Webster

Funding

Training CoreP42ES007381 · NIEHS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI HAHN, MARK E · 1995 to 2019
$46.1M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES007381
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generalized additive models (GAMs) have distinct advantages over generalized linear models as they allow investigators to make inferences about associations between outcomes and predictors without placing parametric restrictions on the associations. The variable of interest is often smoothed using a locally weighted regression (LOESS) and the optimal span (degree of smoothing) can be determined by minimizing the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). A natural hypothesis when using GAMs is to test whether the smoothing term is necessary or if a simpler model would suffice. The statistic of interest is the difference in deviances between models including and excluding the smoothed term. As approximate chi-square tests of this hypothesis are known to be biased, permutation tests are a reasonable alternative. We compare the type I error rates of the chi-square test and of three permutation test methods using synthetic data generated under the null hypothesis. In each permutation method a distribution of differences in deviances is obtained from 999 permuted datasets and the null hypothesis is rejected if the observed statistic falls in the upper 5% of the distribution. One test is a conditional permutation test using the optimal span size for the observed data; this span size is held constant for all permutations. This test is shown to have an inflated type I error rate. Alternatively, the span size can be fixed a priori such that the span selection technique is not reliant on the observed data. This test is shown to be unbiased; however, the choice of span size is not clear. A third method is an unconditional permutation test where the optimal span size is selected for observed and permuted datasets. This test is unbiased though computationally intensive.

Identifiers

PMID20948974
PMCPMC2952638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.