Estimation in generalised linear mixed models with binary outcomes by simulated maximum likelihood

E. S. Ng, J. Carpenter, H. Goldstein, J. Rasbash
{"title":"Estimation in generalised linear mixed models with binary outcomes by simulated maximum likelihood","authors":"E. S. Ng, J. Carpenter, H. Goldstein, J. Rasbash","doi":"10.1191/1471082X06st106oa","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fitting multilevel models to discrete outcome data is problematic because the discrete distribution of the response variable implies an analytically intractable log-likelihood function. Among a number of approximate methods proposed, second-order penalised quasi-likelihood (PQL) is commonly used and is one of the most accurate. Unfortunately, even the second-order PQL approximation has been shown to produce estimates biased toward zero in certain circumstances. This bias can be marked especially when the data are sparse. One option to reduce this bias is to use Monte-Carlo simulation. A bootstrap bias correction method proposed by Kuk has been implemented in MLwiN. However, a similar technique based on the Robbins-Monro (RM) algorithm is potentially more efficient. An alternative is to use simulated maximum likelihood (SML), either alone or to refine estimates identified by other methods. In this article, we first compare bias correction using the RM algorithm, Kuk’s method and SML. We find that SML performs as efficiently as the other two methods and also yields standard errors of the bias-corrected parameter estimates and an estimate of the log-likelihood at the maximum, with which nested models can be compared. Secondly, using simulated and real data examples, we compare SML, second-order Laplace approximation (as implemented in HLM), Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) (in MLwiN) and numerical integration using adaptive quadrature methods (in Stata’s GLLAMM and in SAS’s proc NLMIXED). We find that when the data are sparse, the second-order Laplace approximation produces markedly lower parameter estimates, whereas the MCMC method produces estimates that are noticeably higher than those from the SML and quadrature methods. Although proc NLMIXED is much faster than GLLAMM, it is not designed to fit models of more than two levels. SML produces parameter estimates and log-likelihoods very similar to those from quadrature methods. Further our SML approach extends to handle other link functions, discrete data distributions, non-normal random effects and higher-level models.","PeriodicalId":354759,"journal":{"name":"Statistical Modeling","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"76","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistical Modeling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1191/1471082X06st106oa","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 76

Abstract

Fitting multilevel models to discrete outcome data is problematic because the discrete distribution of the response variable implies an analytically intractable log-likelihood function. Among a number of approximate methods proposed, second-order penalised quasi-likelihood (PQL) is commonly used and is one of the most accurate. Unfortunately, even the second-order PQL approximation has been shown to produce estimates biased toward zero in certain circumstances. This bias can be marked especially when the data are sparse. One option to reduce this bias is to use Monte-Carlo simulation. A bootstrap bias correction method proposed by Kuk has been implemented in MLwiN. However, a similar technique based on the Robbins-Monro (RM) algorithm is potentially more efficient. An alternative is to use simulated maximum likelihood (SML), either alone or to refine estimates identified by other methods. In this article, we first compare bias correction using the RM algorithm, Kuk’s method and SML. We find that SML performs as efficiently as the other two methods and also yields standard errors of the bias-corrected parameter estimates and an estimate of the log-likelihood at the maximum, with which nested models can be compared. Secondly, using simulated and real data examples, we compare SML, second-order Laplace approximation (as implemented in HLM), Markov Chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) (in MLwiN) and numerical integration using adaptive quadrature methods (in Stata’s GLLAMM and in SAS’s proc NLMIXED). We find that when the data are sparse, the second-order Laplace approximation produces markedly lower parameter estimates, whereas the MCMC method produces estimates that are noticeably higher than those from the SML and quadrature methods. Although proc NLMIXED is much faster than GLLAMM, it is not designed to fit models of more than two levels. SML produces parameter estimates and log-likelihoods very similar to those from quadrature methods. Further our SML approach extends to handle other link functions, discrete data distributions, non-normal random effects and higher-level models.
用模拟极大似然法估计具有二元结果的广义线性混合模型
将多水平模型拟合到离散结果数据是有问题的,因为响应变量的离散分布意味着一个难以分析的对数似然函数。在提出的许多近似方法中,二阶惩罚拟似然(PQL)是常用的,也是最准确的一种。不幸的是,在某些情况下,即使是二阶PQL近似也会产生偏向于零的估计。这种偏差可以被标记出来,尤其是在数据稀疏的情况下。减少这种偏差的一个选择是使用蒙特卡罗模拟。Kuk提出的自举偏置校正方法已在MLwiN中实现。然而,基于罗宾斯-门罗(RM)算法的类似技术可能更有效。另一种方法是使用模拟最大似然(SML),可以单独使用,也可以对其他方法确定的估计进行细化。在本文中,我们首先比较了RM算法、Kuk方法和SML方法的偏差校正。我们发现SML的执行效率与其他两种方法一样高,并且还产生了偏差校正参数估计的标准误差和最大对数似然估计,可以与嵌套模型进行比较。其次,通过模拟和真实数据示例,我们比较了SML、二阶拉普拉斯近似(在HLM中实现)、马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗(MCMC)(在MLwiN中)和使用自适应正交方法的数值积分(在Stata的GLLAMM和SAS的NLMIXED过程中)。我们发现,当数据稀疏时,二阶拉普拉斯近似产生明显较低的参数估计,而MCMC方法产生的估计明显高于SML和正交方法。虽然程序NLMIXED比GLLAMM快得多,但它的设计不适合两层以上的模型。SML产生的参数估计和对数似然与正交方法非常相似。此外,我们的SML方法扩展到处理其他链接函数、离散数据分布、非正态随机效应和更高级别的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信