Testing treatment effects in unconfounded studies under model misspecification: Logistic regression, discretization, and their combination

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 28, Issue 20, 2009, Pages 2531-2551

  Cangul, M Z ^a   Chretien, Y R ^a   Gutman, R ^a   Rubin, D B ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Discretization; Logistic regression; Observational studies; Subclassification; Treatment effect

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; COVARIANCE; DISCREDITIZATION; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL VARIABLE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL MODEL; VALIDITY;

ALGORITHMS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 70449427995     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3633     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Rubin D. Bayesian inference for causal effects: the role of randomization. Annals of Statistics 1978; 6:34-58.
2. Rubin DB. Bayesian inference for causality: the importance of randomization. Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association. American Statistical Association: Alexandria, VA, 1975; 233-239.
3. Cochran WG, Rubin DB. Controlling bias in observational studies: a review. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series A 1973; 35:417-466.
4. Rubin D. Matched Sampling for Causal Effects. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2006.
5. Cochran W. The planning of observational studies of human populations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (General) 1965; 128:234-266.
6. Cochran WG. The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics 1968; 24:295-313.
7. Rubin D. Matching to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 1973; 29:159-183.
8. Rubin D. The use of matched sampling and regression adjustment to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics 1973; 29:185-203.
9. Rubin D. Using multivariate matched sampling and regression adjustment to control bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1979; 74:318-328.
10. Glickman SW, Ou FS, DeLong ER, Roe MT, Lytle BL, Mulgund J, Rumsfeld JS, Gibler WB, Ohman EM, Schulman KA. Pay for performance, quality of care, and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction. Journal of the American Medical Association 2007; 297:2373-2380. (Pubitemid 46883750)
11. Hibbeln J, Davis J, Steer C, Emmett P, Rogers I, Williams C, Golding J. Maternal seafood consumption in pregnancy and neurodevelopmental outcomes in childhood (ALSPAC study): an observational cohort study. Lancet 2007; 369:578-585. (Pubitemid 46241443)
12. Hoge C, McGurk D, Thomas J, Cox A, Engel C, Castro C. Mild traumatic brain injury in U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq. New England Journal of Medicine 2008; 358:453-463. (Pubitemid 351185801)
13. Hansen A, Wisborg K, Uldbjerg N, Henriksen T. Risk of respiratory morbidity in term infants delivered by elective caesarean section: cohort study. British Medical Journal 2008; 336:85-87.
14. Maldonado G, Greenland S. Factoring vs linear modeling in rate estimation: a simulation study of relative accuracy. Epidemiology 1998; 9:432-435. (Pubitemid 28298366)
15. Czado C, Santner T. The effect of link misspecification on binary regression inference. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 1992; 33:213-231.
16. Begg M, Lagakos S. Effects of mismodeling on tests of association based on logistic regression models. The Annals of Statistics 1992; 20:1929-1952.
17. McCullagh P, Nelder J. Generalized Linear Models (2nd edn). Chapman & Hall: London, 1989.
18. Guerrero V, Johnson R. Use of the Box-Cox transformation with binary response models. Biometrika 1982; 69:309-314.
19. Burr I. Cumulative frequency functions. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1942; 13:215-232.
20. Lehmann E. Testing Statistical Hypotheses (2nd edn). Springer: Berlin, 1997.
21. Chene G, Thompson S. Methods for summarizing the risk associations of quantitative variables in epidemiologic studies in a consistent form. American Journal of Epidemiology 1996; 144:610-621. (Pubitemid 26304406)
22. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983; 70:41-55.
23. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1984; 79:516-524.
24. Maldonado G, Greenland S. A comparison of the performance of model-based confidence intervals when the correct model form is unknown: coverage of asymptotic means. Epidemiology 1994; 5:171-182. (Pubitemid 24073391)
25. White H. Maximum likelihood estimation of misspecified models. Econometrica 1982; 50:1-25.
26. Yancy Jr WS, Macpherson DS, Hanusa BH, Switzer GE, Arnold RM, Buranosky RA, Kapoor WN. Patient satisfaction in resident and attending ambulatory care clinics. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2001; 16:755-762.
27. Aiken LH, Clarke SP, Sloane DM, Sochalski J, Silber JH. Hospital nurse staffing and patient mortality, nurse burnout, and job dissatisfaction. Journal of the American Medical Association 2002; 288:1897-1993. (Pubitemid 35204688)
28. Pregibon D. Goodness of link tests for generalized linear models. Applied Statistics 1980; 29:15-24.
29. Landwehr J, Pregibon D, Shoemaker A. Graphical methods for assessing logistic regression models (with Discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association 1984; 79:61-83.
30. Hosmer D, Hosmer T, Cessie SL, Lemeshow S. A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model. Statistics in Medicine 1997; 16:965-980. (Pubitemid 27198985)
31. Prentice R. A generalization of the probit and logit methods for dose response curves. Biometrics 1976; 32:761-768. (Pubitemid 8002279)
32. Aranda-Ordaz F. On two families of transformations to additivity for binary response data. Biometrika 1981; 68:357-363.
33. Stukel T. Generalized logistic models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1988; 83:426-431.
34. Liu C. Robit regression: a simple robust alternative to logistic and probit regression. In Applied Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference from Incomplete-data Perspectives, Chapter 21, Gelman A, Meng XL (eds). Wiley: New York, 2004.
35. Kim HJ. Binary regression with a class of skewed t link models. Communications in Statistics. Theory and Methods 2002; 31:1863-1886.
36. Kim S, Chen MH, Dey D. Flexible generalized t-link models for binary response data. Biometrika 2008; 95:93-106. (Pubitemid 351333327)