Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26692600›Full record

ArticleComputational statistics & data analysis2015

Using Retrospective Sampling to Estimate Models of Relationship Status in Large Longitudinal Social Networks.

A James O'Malley, Sudeshna Paul

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational statistics & data analysis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A James O'MalleyThe Dartmouth Institute for Healh Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH 03766, USA.
Sudeshna PaulNell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice · USEmory University · US

Funding

The Spread of Health Behaviors in the Framingham Heart Study Social NetworkP01AG031093 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CHRISTAKIS, NICHOLAS A · 2008 to 2012
$10.7M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG031093
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Estimation of longitudinal models of relationship status between all pairs of individuals (dyads) in social networks is challenging due to the complex inter-dependencies among observations and lengthy computation times. To reduce the computational burden of model estimation, a method is developed that subsamples the "always-null" dyads in which no relationships develop throughout the period of observation. The informative sampling process is accounted for by weighting the likelihood contributions of the observations by the inverses of the sampling probabilities. This weighted-likelihood estimation method is implemented using Bayesian computation and evaluated in terms of its bias, efficiency, and speed of computation under various settings. Comparisons are also made to a full information likelihood-based procedure that is only feasible to compute when limited follow-up observations are available. Calculations are performed on two real social networks of very different sizes. The easily computed weighted-likelihood procedure closely approximates the corresponding estimates for the full network, even when using low sub-sampling fractions. The fast computation times make the weighted-likelihood approach practical and able to be applied to networks of any size.

Indexed as

Conditional independenceLongitudinalRetrospective samplingSocial networkSociocentric designSparse dataWeighting

Identifiers

PMID26692600
PMCPMC4673682
OpenAlexW1983402764

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.