ArticleStatistics in medicine2020
Two-part models for repeatedly measured ordinal data with "don't know" category.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multivariate mixed models accounting for don't know options in ordinal data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2025Article
- Cost Comparison and Spending on Tobacco Products: Evidence From A Nationally Representative Sample of Adult E-cigarette Users.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ordinal data (eg, "low," "medium," "high"; graded response on a Likert scale) with an additional "don't know" category are frequently encountered in the medical, social, and behavioral science literature. The handling of a "don't know" option presents unique challenges as it often "destroys" the ordinal nature of the data. Commonly, nominal models are employed which ignore the partial ordering and have a complicated interpretation, especially in situations with repeatedly measured outcomes. We propose two-part models that easily accommodate longitudinal partially ordered (semiordinal) data. The most easily interpretable formulation consists of a random effect logistic submodel for "don't know" vs all the other categories combined, and a random effect ordinal submodel for the ordered categories. Correlated random effects account for statistical dependence within individual. An extension allowing for nonproportionality of odds for the predictor effects in the ordinal submodel is also considered. Maximum likelihood estimation is performed using adaptive Gaussian quadrature in SAS PROC NLMIXED. A simulation study is performed to evaluate the performance of the estimation algorithm in terms of bias and efficiency, and to compare the results of joint and separate models of the two parts, and of proportional and nonproportional model formulations. The methods are motivated and illustrated on a dataset from a study of adolescents' perceptions of nicotine strength of JUUL e-cigarettes. Using the proposed approach we show that adolescents perceive 5% nicotine content as relatively low, a misconception more pronounced among past month nonusers than among past month users of JUUL e-cigarettes.
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.