ArticleStatistical methods in medical research2016
Multiscale measurement error models for aggregated small area health data.
Article in Statistical methods in medical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From infectious diseases to chronic diseases: the paradigm shift of spatial epidemiology in disease prevention and control.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Modeling Provincial Covid-19 Epidemic Data Using an Adjusted Time-Dependent SIRD Model.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Multivariate Air Pollution Prediction Modeling with partial Missingness.Environmetrics · 2019Article
- Zero-inflated multiscale models for aggregated small area health data.Environmetrics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spatial data are often aggregated from a finer (smaller) to a coarser (larger) geographical level. The process of data aggregation induces a scaling effect which smoothes the variation in the data. To address the scaling problem, multiscale models that link the convolution models at different scale levels via the shared random effect have been proposed. One of the main goals in aggregated health data is to investigate the relationship between predictors and an outcome at different geographical levels. In this paper, we extend multiscale models to examine whether a predictor effect at a finer level hold true at a coarser level. To adjust for predictor uncertainty due to aggregation, we applied measurement error models in the framework of multiscale approach. To assess the benefit of using multiscale measurement error models, we compare the performance of multiscale models with and without measurement error in both real and simulated data. We found that ignoring the measurement error in multiscale models underestimates the regression coefficient, while it overestimates the variance of the spatially structured random effect. On the other hand, accounting for the measurement error in multiscale models provides a better model fit and unbiased parameter estimates.
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.