ArticlePloS one2015
A Multilevel Regression Model for Geographical Studies in Sets of Non-Adjacent Cities.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, small-area-based ecological regression analyses have been published that study the association between a health outcome and a covariate in several cities. These analyses have usually been performed independently for each city and have therefore yielded unrelated estimates for the cities considered, even though the same process has been studied in all of them. In this study, we propose a joint ecological regression model for multiple cities that accounts for spatial structure both within and between cities and explore the advantages of this model. The proposed model merges both disease mapping and geostatistical ideas. Our proposal is compared with two alternatives, one that models the association for each city as fixed effects and another that treats them as independent and identically distributed random effects. The proposed model allows us to estimate the association (and assess its significance) at locations with no available data. Our proposal is illustrated by an example of the association between unemployment (as a deprivation surrogate) and lung cancer mortality among men in 31 Spanish cities. In this example, the associations found were far more accurate for the proposed model than those from the fixed effects model. Our main conclusion is that ecological regression analyses can be markedly improved by performing joint analyses at several locations that share information among them. This finding should be taken into consideration in the design of future epidemiological studies.
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.