Semiparametric modeling of grouped current duration data with preferential reporting

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 23, 2014, Pages 3961-3972

  McLain, Alexander C ^a   Sundaram, Rajeshwari ^b   Thoma, Marie ^b   Buck Louis, Germaine M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

backwards recurrence times; current duration; digit preference; grouped survival data; proportional hazards model

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; BOOTSTRAPPING; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DIGIT PREFERENCE; GROUPED CURRENT DURATION DATA; HISTOGRAM; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MATHEMATICAL VARIABLE; PARAMETRIC TEST; PARITY; PREGNANCY; PROBABILITY; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL BIAS; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS;

EID: 84999974869     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6216     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility 2013; 99:63.
2. Chandra A, Copen CE, Stephen EH. Infertility and impaired fecundity in the united states, 1982–2010: Data from the national survey of family growth. National Health Statistics Reports 2013; 67:1–18.
3. Thoma ME, McLain AC, Louis JF, King RB, Trumble AC, Sundaram R, Louis GMB. Prevalence of infertility in the united states as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. Fertility and Sterility 2013; 99:1324–1331.e1.
4. Louis JF, Thoma ME, Sørensen DN, McLain AC, King RB, Sundaram R, Keiding N, Buck Louis GM. The prevalence of couple infertility in the united states from a male perspective: evidence from a nationally representative sample. Andrology 2013; 1:741–748.
5. Keiding N, Kvist K, Hartvig H, Tvede M, Juul S. Estimating time to pregnancy from current durations in a cross-sectional sample. Biostatistics 2002; 3:565–578.
6. Tietze Ch. Fertility after discontinuation of intrauterine and oral contraception. International Journal of Fertility 1968; 13:385–389.
7. Zinaman MJ, Clegg ED, Brown ChC, O'connor J, Selevan SG. Estimates of human fertility and pregnancy loss. Fertility and Sterility 1996; 65:503–509.
8. Louis GMB, Sundaram R, Schisterman EF, Sweeney AM, Lynch CD, Gore-Langton RE, Chen Z, Kim S, Caldwell KL, Barr DB. Heavy metals and couple fecundity, the LIFE study. Chemosphere 2012; 87:1201–1207.
9. Bak CW, Seok HH, Song S-H, Kim ES, Her YS, Yoon TK. Hormonal imbalances and psychological scars left behind in infertile men. Journal of Andrology 2012; 33:181–189.
10. Schmid J, Kirchengast S, Vytiska-Binstorfer E, Huber J. Infertility caused by PCOS health-related quality of life among Austrian and Moslem immigrant women in Austria. Human Reproduction 2004; 19:2251–2257.
11. Wu AK, Elliott P, Katz PP, Smith JF. Time costs of fertility care: the hidden hardship of building a family. Fertility and Sterility 2013; 99:2025–2030.
12. Weinberg CR, Gladen BC. The beta–geometric distribution applied to comparative fecundability studies. Biometrics 1986; 42:547–560.
13. Keiding N, Højbjerg Hansen OK, Sørensen D, Slama R. The current duration approach to estimating time to pregnancy. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 2012; 39:185–204.
14. Allison PD. Survival analysis of backward recurrence times. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1985; 80:315–322.
15. Ali MM, Marshall T, Babiker AG. Analysis of incomplete durations with application to contraceptive use. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) 2001; 164:549–563.
16. Keiding N, Fine JP, Hansen OH, Slama R. Accelerated failure time regression for backward recurrence times and current durations. Statistics & Probability Letters 2011; 81:724–729.
17. Dunson DB, Stanford JB. Bayesian inferences on predictors of conception probabilities. Biometrics 2005; 61:126–133.
18. Scarpa B, Dunson DB. Bayesian methods for searching for optimal rules for timing intercourse to achieve pregnancy. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26:1920–1936.
19. Sundaram R, McLain AC, Buck Louis GM. A survival analysis approach to modeling human fecundity. Biostatistics 2012; 13:4–17.
20. Scheike TH, Jensen TK. A discrete survival model with random effects: an application to time to pregnancy. Biometrics 1997; 53:318–329.
21. Scheike TH, Petersen JH, Martinussen T. Retrospective ascertainment of recurrent events: an application to time to pregnancy. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1999; 94(447):713–725.
22. Scheike TH, Keiding N. Design and analysis of time-to-pregnancy. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 2006; 15:127–140.
23. Cox DR. Some sampling problems in technology. In New Developments in Survey Sampling, Johnson N, Smith H (eds). Wiley: New York, 1969.
24. Mandel M. The competing risks illness death model under cross-sectional sampling. Biostatistics 2010; 11:290–303.
25. Fahrmeir L, Tutz G. Multivariate Statistical Modelling Based on Generalized Linear Models Second, Springer Series in Statistics. Springer-Verlag: New York, 2001.
26. Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1972; 34:187–220.
27. Ridout MS, Morgan BJT. Modelling digit preference in fecundability studies. Biometrics 1991; 47:1423–1433.
28. Pickering RM. Digit preference in estimated gestational age. Statistics in Medicine 1992; 11:1225–1238.
29. Price KL, Seaman JW. Bayesian modeling of retrospective time-to-pregnancy data with digit preference bias. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 2006; 43:1424–1433.
30. Bar HY, Lillard DR. Accounting for heaping in retrospectively reported event data a mixture-model approach. Statistics in Medicine 2012; 31:3347–3365.
31. Heitjan DF, Rubin DB. Ignorability and coarse data. The Annals of Statistics 12 1991; 19(4):2244–2253.
32. Gill RD, Laan MJ, Robins JM. Coarsening at random: characterizations, conjectures, counter-examples. In Proceedings of the First Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics, Lin D, Fleming T (eds), Lecture Notes in Statistics, vol. 123. Springer: US, 1997; 255–294.
33. Gill RD, Robins JM. Sequential models for coarsening and missingness. In Proceedings of the First Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics, Lin D, Fleming T (eds), Lecture Notes in Statistics, vol. 123. Springer: US, 1997; 295–305.
34. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2013.
35. Ecochard R, Clayton DG. Multivariate parametric random effect regression models for fecundability studies. Biometrics 2000; 56:1023–1029.
36. Feller W. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, Vol. II. John Wiley & Sons Inc.: New York, 1966.
37. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis KE, Groves RM, van Hoewyk J, Willem J. National survey of family growth, cycle 6: Sample design, weighting, imputation, and variance estimation. National Health Statistics Reports 2006; 142:1–63.
38. Cooney MA, Louis GMB, Sundaram R, McGuiness BM, Lynch CD. Validity of self-reported time to pregnancy. Epidemiology 2009; 20(1):56–59.
39. Zielhuis GA, Hulscher MEJL, Florack EIM. Validity and reliability of a questionnaire on fecundability. International Journal of Epidemiology 1992; 21(6):1151–1156.
40. Joffe M. Time trends in biological fertility in britain. The Lancet 2000; 355(9219):1961–1965.
41. Joffe M, Holmes J, Jensen TK, Keiding N, Best N. Time trends in biological fertility in western europe. American Journal of Epidemiology 2013; 178(5):722–730.
42. Slama R, Ducot B, Carstensen L, Lorente C, Rochebrochard EdL, Leridon H, Keiding N, Bouyer J. Feasibility of the current–duration approach to studying human fecundity. Epidemiology 2006; 17(4):440–449.