ArticlePsychometrika2016
As Good as GOLD: Gram-Schmidt Orthogonalization by Another Name.
Article in Psychometrika, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Comparison of Two-Stage Approaches for Fitting Nonlinear Ordinary Differential Equation Models with Mixed Effects.Multivariate behavioral researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generalized orthogonal linear derivative (GOLD) estimates were proposed to correct a problem of correlated estimation errors in generalized local linear approximation (GLLA). This paper shows that GOLD estimates are related to GLLA estimates by the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process. Analytical work suggests that GLLA estimates are derivatives of an approximating polynomial and GOLD estimates are linear combinations of these derivatives. A series of simulation studies then further investigates and tests the analytical properties derived. The first study shows that when approximating or smoothing noisy data, GLLA outperforms GOLD, but when interpolating noisy data GOLD outperforms GLLA. The second study shows that when data are not noisy, GLLA always outperforms GOLD in terms of derivative estimation. Thus, when data can be smoothed or are not noisy, GLLA is preferred whereas when they cannot then GOLD is preferred. The last studies show situations where GOLD can produce biased estimates. In spite of these possible shortcomings of GOLD to produce accurate and unbiased estimates, GOLD may still provide adequate or improved model estimation because of its orthogonal error structure. However, GOLD should not be used purely for derivative estimation because the error covariance structure is irrelevant in this case. Future research should attempt to find orthogonal polynomial derivative estimators that produce accurate and unbiased derivatives with an orthogonal error structure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27650775What 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.