| Date: | Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:43:58 +0100 |
| Reply-To: | Ulf Emanuelson <Ulf.Emanuelson@EPID.SLU.SE> |
| Sender: | "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU> |
| From: | Ulf Emanuelson <Ulf.Emanuelson@EPID.SLU.SE> |
| Subject: | GLIMMIX gives biased results? |
|---|
Hi gurus!
On another list that I'm "listening" to, first a message came advocating the
SAS-macro GLIMMIX and then another message came warning against some
problems with the approach used (part of that message attached below). Now I
wonder if there's someone out there, that understands these estimation
approaches better than me (should be plenty :-), that could tell if this is
really the case and then where the possible limits are for creating the problem?
TIA!
Ulf Emanuelson
Unit of Epidemiology
Swedish Univ. Agric. Sci.
----------original
message-------------------------------------------------------
It's been mentioned that there is a SAS macro for fitting
random effects logistic regression models to longitudinal
or clustered binary data. Unfortunately, it has been
shown (e.g., Breslow and Lin, Biometrika, 1995)
that the estimation approach
that the macro uses (iterative fits of a weighted linear
mixed effects model) is *biased* for small to moderate
cluster sizes (e.g., numbers of observations per subject)
or small to moderately sized variance components (i.e.,
within-cluster or -subject correlation).
---snip
Tom TenHave
Center for Biostatistics and Epidemiology
Hershey Medical Center
Penn State University
email ttenhave@biostats.hmc.psu.edu
|