ArticleBMC medical research methodology2014
A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Abstinence-contingent wage supplements for adults experiencing homelessness and alcohol use disorder: A randomized clinical trial.Preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- Association between metal co-exposure and frailty: exploring the potential explanatory pathway of inflammation.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of statistical methods for the analysis of patient-reported outcomes in randomised controlled trials: A simulation study.Statistical methods in medical research · 2024Article
- Disentangling Drivers of Food Waste in Households: Evidence from Nigeria.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Tree-Based Machine Learning to Identify and Understand Major Determinants for Stroke at the Neighborhood Level.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Article
- Erratum to: A Monte Carlo simulation study comparing linear regression, beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression at recovering average difference measures in a two sample design.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn biomedical research, response variables are often encountered which have bounded support on the open unit interval--(0,1). Traditionally, researchers have attempted to estimate covariate effects on these types of response data using linear regression. Alternative modelling strategies may include: beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression, and fractional logit regression models. This study employs a Monte Carlo simulation design to compare the statistical properties of the linear regression model to that of the more novel beta regression, variable-dispersion beta regression, and fractional logit regression models.
methodsIn the Monte Carlo experiment we assume a simple two sample design. We assume observations are realizations of independent draws from their respective probability models. The randomly simulated draws from the various probability models are chosen to emulate average proportion/percentage/rate differences of pre-specified magnitudes. Following simulation of the experimental data we estimate average proportion/percentage/rate differences. We compare the estimators in terms of bias, variance, type-1 error and power. Estimates of Monte Carlo error associated with these quantities are provided.
resultsIf response data are beta distributed with constant dispersion parameters across the two samples, then all models are unbiased and have reasonable type-1 error rates and power profiles. If the response data in the two samples have different dispersion parameters, then the simple beta regression model is biased. When the sample size is small (N0 = N1 = 25) linear regression has superior type-1 error rates compared to the other models. Small sample type-1 error rates can be improved in beta regression models using bias correction/reduction methods. In the power experiments, variable-dispersion beta regression and fractional logit regression models have slightly elevated power compared to linear regression models. Similar results were observed if the response data are generated from a discrete multinomial distribution with support on (0,1).
conclusionsThe linear regression model, the variable-dispersion beta regression model and the fractional logit regression model all perform well across the simulation experiments under consideration. When employing beta regression to estimate covariate effects on (0,1) response data, researchers should ensure their dispersion sub-model is properly specified, else inferential errors could arise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.