A new method of regression calibration - comparison with other methods of correcting covariate error

Abstract Number:

2959 

Submission Type:

Contributed Abstract 

Contributed Abstract Type:

Paper 

Participants:

Mark Little (1), Nobuyuki Hamada (2), Lydia Zablotska (3)

Institutions:

(1) Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, N/A, (2) Biology and Environmental Chemistry Division, Sustainable System Research Laboratory, CRIEPI, Chiba, Japan, (3) UCSF, N/A

Co-Author(s):

Nobuyuki Hamada  
Biology and Environmental Chemistry Division, Sustainable System Research Laboratory, CRIEPI
Lydia Zablotska  
UCSF

First Author:

Mark Little  
Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute

Presenting Author:

Mark Little  
Radiation Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute

Abstract Text:

Low-dose radiation risks must be extrapolated from groups exposed at much higher levels of dose. Recently, there has been much attention paid to methods of dealing with shared errors, which are common in many datasets, and particularly important in occupational and environmental settings.
We assess regression calibration (RC), Monte Carlo maximum likelihood (MCML), frequentist model averaging (FMA), 2D Monte Carlo+Bayesian model averaging (2DMC+BMA) methods with simulated datasets having mixed Berkson and classical errors. We test all these against a modification of RC, the extended regression calibration (ERC) method. 2DMC+BMA has poor coverage for the dose coefficients; coverage of RC, MCML, FMA is better, although uniformly too high for FMA and MCML, and best for ERC. Bias in predicted relative risk is generally smallest for ERC, and largest for quasi-2DMC+BMA and FMA methods, with RC and MCML exhibiting bias in predicted risk somewhat intermediate between the other two methods. In summary, the new ERC method performs well in comparison to previously proposed methods and is particularly suited to situations with low to moderate amounts of shared and unshared Berkson errors.

Keywords:

Covariate measurement error|Berkson error|Classical error|Regression calibration|Bayesian model averaging|Frequentist model averaging

Sponsors:

Section on Statistics and the Environment

Tracks:

Environmental Policy and Regulations

Can this be considered for alternate subtype?

No

Are you interested in volunteering to serve as a session chair?

Yes

I have read and understand that JSM participants must abide by the Participant Guidelines.

Yes

I understand that JSM participants must register and pay the appropriate registration fee by June 1, 2024. The registration fee is non-refundable.

I understand