Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31664912›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019

Unweighted regression models perform better than weighted regression techniques for respondent-driven sampling data: results from a simulation study.

Lisa Avery, Nooshin Rotondi, Constance McKnight, Michelle Firestone, Janet Smylie, Michael Rotondi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

81 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Lisa AveryYork University, 4700 Keele St, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada. lavery@maths.otago.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0002-8431-5143
Nooshin RotondiWell Living House, Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Constance McKnightDe dwa da dehs nye>s Aboriginal Health Centre, 678 Main St E, Hamilton, ON, L8M 1K2, Canada.
Michelle FirestoneWell Living House, Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Janet SmylieWell Living House, Centre for Urban Health Solutions, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Michael RotondiYork University, 4700 Keele St, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada.

Funding

Canadian Institute of Health Research 133703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unclear whether weighted or unweighted regression is preferred in the analysis of data derived from respondent driven sampling. Our objective was to evaluate the validity of various regression models, with and without weights and with various controls for clustering in the estimation of the risk of group membership from data collected using respondent-driven sampling (RDS).

methodsTwelve networked populations, with varying levels of homophily and prevalence, based on a known distribution of a continuous predictor were simulated using 1000 RDS samples from each population. Weighted and unweighted binomial and Poisson general linear models, with and without various clustering controls and standard error adjustments were modelled for each sample and evaluated with respect to validity, bias and coverage rate. Population prevalence was also estimated.

resultsIn the regression analysis, the unweighted log-link (Poisson) models maintained the nominal type-I error rate across all populations. Bias was substantial and type-I error rates unacceptably high for weighted binomial regression. Coverage rates for the estimation of prevalence were highest using RDS-weighted logistic regression, except at low prevalence (10%) where unweighted models are recommended.

conclusionsCaution is warranted when undertaking regression analysis of RDS data. Even when reported degree is accurate, low reported degree can unduly influence regression estimates. Unweighted Poisson regression is therefore recommended.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsModels, TheoreticalRegression AnalysisHIV InfectionsHumansLogistic ModelsPrevalenceReproducibility of ResultsSampling StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID31664912
PMCPMC6819607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.