Test of marginal compatibility and smoothing methods for exchangeable binary data with unequal cluster sizes

Biometrics

Volumn 63, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 218-227

  Pang, Zhen ^a   Kuk, Anthony Y C ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Compatibility of marginal distributions; EM algorithm; Exchangeable binary data; Kernel smoothing; Penalized likelihood; Smoothing of discrete data

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; CLUSTERING ALGORITHMS; MAXIMUM PRINCIPLE; PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS; STATISTICS;

BINARY DATA; COMPATIBILITY OF MARGINAL DISTRIBUTION; DISCRETE DATA; EXCHANGEABLE BINARY DATA; EXPECTATIONS MAXIMIZATION ALGORITHMS; KERNEL SMOOTHING; MARGINAL DISTRIBUTION; PENALIZED LIKELIHOOD; PENALIZED-LIKELIHOOD; SMOOTHING OF DISCRETE DATA;

BIOMETRICS;

ALGORITHM; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DATA SET; MODELING; SAMPLING; SMOOTHING; TESTING METHOD; TOXICITY;

ARTICLE; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COVARIANCE; KERNEL METHOD; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION;

EID: 34247214525     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: 15410420     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00678.x     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Aerts, M., Geys, H., Molenberghs, G., and Ryan, L. M. (2002). Topics in Modelling of Clustered Data. New York: Chapman and Hall.
2. Altham, P. M. E. (1978). Two generalizations of the binomial distribution. Applied Statistics 27, 162-167.
3. Armitage, P. (1955). Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics 11, 375-386.
4. Bowman, D. and George, E. O. (1995). A saturated model for analyzing exchangeable binary data: Applications to clinical and developmental toxicity study. Journal of the American Statistical Association 90, 871-879.
5. Brooks, S. P., Morgan, B. J. T., Ridout, M. S., and Pack, S. E. (1997). Finite mixture models for proportions. Biometrics 53, 1097-1115.
6. Chan, J. S. K. and Kuk, A. Y. C. (1997). Maximum likelihood estimation for probit-linear mixed models with correlated random effects. Biometrics 53, 86-97.
7. Dunson, D. B. (1998). Dose-dependent number of implants and implications in developmental toxicity. Biometrics 54, 558-569.
8. Dunson, D. B., Chen, Z., and Harry, J. (2003). A Bayesian approach for joint modeling of cluster size and subunit-specific outcomes. Biometrics 59, 521-530.
9. Feller, W. (1971). An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, Volume II, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley.
10. Fleiss, J. L. and Cuzick, J. (1979). The reliability of dichotomous judgements: Unequal numbers of judges per subject. Applied Psychological Measurement 3, 537-542.
11. George, E. O. and Bowman, D. (1995). A full likelihood procedure for analysing exchangeable binary data. Biometrics 51, 512-523.
12. Kuk, A. Y. C. (2003). A generalised estimating equation approach to modelling foetal response in developmental toxicity studies when number of implants is dose-dependent. Applied Statistics 52, 51-61.
13. Kuk, A. Y. C. (2004). A litter-based approach to risk assessment in developmental toxicity studies via a power family of completely monotone functions. Applied Statistics 53, 369-386.
14. Pang, Z. and Kuk, A. Y. C. (2005). A shared response model for clustered binary data in developmental toxicity studies. Biometrics 61, 1076-1084.
15. Regan, M. M. and Catalano, P. J. (1999). Likelihood models for clustered binary and continuous outcomes. Biometrics 55, 760-768.
16. Ridout, M. S., Demétrio, C. G. B., and Firth, D. (1999). Estimating intraclass correlation for binary data. Biometrics 55, 137-148.
17. Simonoff, J. S. (1983). A penalty function approach to smoothing large sparse contingency tables. Annals of Statistics 11, 208-218.
18. Simonoff, J. S. (1996). Smoothing Methods in Statistics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
19. Stefanescu, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (2003). Likelihood inference for exchangeable binary data with varying cluster sizes. Biometrics 59, 18-24.
20. Stefanescu, C. and Turnbull, B. W. (2005). On the multi-variate probit model for exchangeable binary data with covariates. Biometrical Journal 47, 206-218.
21. Williams, D. A. (1975). The analysis of binary responses from toxicological experiments involving reproduction and teratogenicity. Biometrics 31, 949-952.
22. Williamson, J. M., Datta, S., and Satten, G. A. (2003). Marginal analysis of clustered data when cluster size is informative. Biometrics 59, 36-42.
23. Xu, J. and Prorok, P. C. (2003). Modelling and analyzing exchangeable binary data with random cluster sizes. Statistics in Medicine 22, 2401-2416.