ArticleStatistics and computing2021
Fisher Scoring for crossed factor linear mixed models.
Article in Statistics and computing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal analysis of the ABCD® study.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2025Review
- Decentralized Mixed Effects Modeling in COINSTAC.Neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- FEMA: Fast and efficient mixed-effects algorithm for large sample whole-brain imaging data.Human brain mapping · 2024Article
- Training load comparison between small, medium, and large-sided games in professional football.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
- BLMM: Parallelised computing for big linear mixed models.NeuroImage · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The analysis of longitudinal, heterogeneous or unbalanced clustered data is of primary importance to a wide range of applications. The linear mixed model (LMM) is a popular and flexible extension of the linear model specifically designed for such purposes. Historically, a large proportion of material published on the LMM concerns the application of popular numerical optimization algorithms, such as Newton-Raphson, Fisher Scoring and expectation maximization to single-factor LMMs (i.e. LMMs that only contain one "factor" by which observations are grouped). However, in recent years, the focus of the LMM literature has moved towards the development of estimation and inference methods for more complex, multi-factored designs. In this paper, we present and derive new expressions for the extension of an algorithm classically used for single-factor LMM parameter estimation, Fisher Scoring, to multiple, crossed-factor designs. Through simulation and real data examples, we compare five variants of the Fisher Scoring algorithm with one another, as well as against a baseline established by the R package lme4, and find evidence of correctness and strong computational efficiency for four of the five proposed approaches. Additionally, we provide a new method for LMM Satterthwaite degrees of freedom estimation based on analytical results, which does not require iterative gradient estimation. Via simulation, we find that this approach produces estimates with both lower bias and lower variance than the existing methods. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11222-021-10026-6.
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.