首页> 外文期刊>Model assisted statistics and applications >A comparison between the design-based and model-based approaches using longitudinal survey data
【24h】

A comparison between the design-based and model-based approaches using longitudinal survey data

机译:使用纵向调查数据的基于设计的方法与基于模型的方法之间的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Survey data analysis using complex sampling designs ought to account for clustering, stratification and unequal probability of selection. Design-based and model-based methods are two commonly used routes taken to account for such survey designs. Several studies of cross-sectional survey designs have shown that these two approaches provide similar results when the model fits the data well. The present paper aims at comparing these two approaches for longitudinal survey design using the National Population Health Survey (NPHS) dataset. A marginal modeling approach proposed by Rao and modified bootstrap method for longitudinal data were used by way of a design-based method. The Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) method, proposed by Liang and Zeger was used as a typical model-based approach. The parameter estimates obtained using the design-based and model-based methods were similar. However, the standard errors and the 95% confidence interval were different. Rao's method produced the most conservative standard errors. In conclusion, design-based methods should be preferred over model-based methods, as this method provides reliable results.
机译:使用复杂抽样设计的调查数据分析应考虑到聚类,分层和不平等的选择概率。基于设计的方法和基于模型的方法是考虑此类调查设计的两种常用途径。对横截面调查设计的多项研究表明,当模型很好地拟合数据时,这两种方法可以提供相似的结果。本文旨在比较使用全国人口健康调查(NPHS)数据集进行纵向调查设计的这两种方法。通过基于设计的方法,使用了Rao提出的边际建模方法和改进的bootstrap方法来处理纵向数据。 Liang和Zeger提出的广义估计方程(GEE)方法被用作典型的基于模型的方法。使用基于设计的方法和基于模型的方法获得的参数估计值相似。但是,标准误和95%置信区间不同。饶的方法产生了最保守的标准误差。总之,基于设计的方法应优于基于模型的方法,因为该方法可提供可靠的结果。

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