Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35681120›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2022

An investigation of penalization and data augmentation to improve convergence of generalized estimating equations for clustered binary outcomes.

Angelika Geroldinger, Rok Blagus, Helen Ogden, Georg Heinze

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Angelika GeroldingerMedical University of Vienna, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent System, Section for Clinical Biometrics, Spitalgasse 23, A-1090, Vienna, Austria.
Rok BlagusUniversity of Ljubljana, Institute of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Helen OgdenUniversity of Southampton, School of Mathematical Sciences, Southampton, UK.
Georg HeinzeMedical University of Vienna, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent System, Section for Clinical Biometrics, Spitalgasse 23, A-1090, Vienna, Austria. georg.heinze@meduniwien.ac.at.
Medical University of Vienna · ATStatistics Austria · ATUniversity of Ljubljana · SIUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn binary logistic regression data are 'separable' if there exists a linear combination of explanatory variables which perfectly predicts the observed outcome, leading to non-existence of some of the maximum likelihood coefficient estimates. A popular solution to obtain finite estimates even with separable data is Firth's logistic regression (FL), which was originally proposed to reduce the bias in coefficient estimates. The question of convergence becomes more involved when analyzing clustered data as frequently encountered in clinical research, e.g. data collected in several study centers or when individuals contribute multiple observations, using marginal logistic regression models fitted by generalized estimating equations (GEE). From our experience we suspect that separable data are a sufficient, but not a necessary condition for non-convergence of GEE. Thus, we expect that generalizations of approaches that can handle separable uncorrelated data may reduce but not fully remove the non-convergence issues of GEE.

methodsWe investigate one recently proposed and two new extensions of FL to GEE. With 'penalized GEE' the GEE are treated as score equations, i.e. as derivatives of a log-likelihood set to zero, which are then modified as in FL. We introduce two approaches motivated by the equivalence of FL and maximum likelihood estimation with iteratively augmented data. Specifically, we consider fully iterated and single-step versions of this 'augmented GEE' approach. We compare the three approaches with respect to convergence behavior, practical applicability and performance using simulated data and a real data example.

resultsOur simulations indicate that all three extensions of FL to GEE substantially improve convergence compared to ordinary GEE, while showing a similar or even better performance in terms of accuracy of coefficient estimates and predictions. Penalized GEE often slightly outperforms the augmented GEE approaches, but this comes at the cost of a higher burden of implementation.

conclusionsWhen fitting marginal logistic regression models using GEE on sparse data we recommend to apply penalized GEE if one has access to a suitable software implementation and single-step augmented GEE otherwise.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalBiasComputer SimulationHumansLikelihood FunctionsLogistic ModelsClustered dataFirth’s logistic regressionGeneralized estimating equationsLogistic regressionNon-convergenceSeparation

Identifiers

PMID35681120
PMCPMC9178839
OpenAlexW4281759155

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.