首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Epidemiology >Methods of Covariate Selection: Directed Acyclic Graphs and the Change-in-Estimate Procedure
【24h】

Methods of Covariate Selection: Directed Acyclic Graphs and the Change-in-Estimate Procedure

机译:协变量选择的方法:有向无环图和估计变化过程

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Four covariate selection approaches were compared: a directed acyclic graph (DAG) full model and 3 DAG and change-in-estimate combined procedures. Twenty-five scenarios with case-control samples were generated from 10 simulated populations in order to address the performance of these covariate selection procedures in the presence of confounders of various strengths and under DAG misspecification with omission of confounders or inclusion of nonconfounders. Performance was evaluated by standard error, bias, square root of the mean-squared error, and 95% confidence interval coverage. In most scenarios, the DAG full model without further covariate selection performed as well as or better than the other procedures when the DAGs were correctly specified, as well as when confounders were omitted. Model reduction by using change-in-estimate procedures showed potential gains in precision when the DAGs included nonconfounders, but underestimation of regression-based standard error might cause reduction in 95% confidence interval coverage. For modeling binary outcomes in a case-control study, the authors recommend construction of a “conservative” DAG, determination of all potential confounders, and then change-in-estimate procedures to simplify this full model. The authors advocate that, under the conditions investigated, the selection of final model should be based on changes in precision: Adopt the reduced model if its standard error (derived from logistic regression) is substantially smaller; otherwise, the full DAG-based model is appropriate.
机译:比较了四种协变量选择方法:有向无环图(DAG)完整模型和3个DAG和估计变化组合过程。为了解决这些协变量选择程序在各种强度的混杂因素存在下和DAG错误指定且忽略混杂因素或包含非混杂因素的情况下的性能,从10个模拟人群中生成了25个病例对照样本。通过标准误差,偏差,均方误差的平方根和95%置信区间覆盖范围来评估性能。在大多数情况下,在正确指定DAG时以及省略混杂因素时,没有其他协变量选择的DAG完整模型的执行效果优于或优于其他过程。当DAG包含非混杂因素时,使用估计变化程序进行模型缩减显示出潜在的精度提高,但基于回归的标准误的低估可能会导致95%置信区间覆盖率降低。为了在病例对照研究中对二元结果进行建模,作者建议构建“保守” DAG,确定所有潜在的混杂因素,然后进行估计变更程序以简化此完整模型。作者主张,在调查的条件下,最终模型的选择应基于精度的变化:如果标准误差(由逻辑回归得出)显着较小,则采用简化模型。否则,基于完整DAG的模型是合适的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号