Differences in mail and telephone responses to self-rated health: use of multiple imputation in correcting for response bias

Objectives: To estimate differences in self-rated health by mode of administration and to assess the value of multiple imputation to make self-rated health comparable for telephone and mail. Methods: In 1996, Survey 1 of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health was answered by mail. In 1998, 706 and 11,595 mid-age women answered Survey 2 by telephone and mail respectively. Self-rated health was measured by the physical and mental health scores of the SF-36. Mean change in SF-36 scores between Surveys 1 and 2 were compared for telephone and mail respondents to Survey 2, before and after adjustment for socio-demographic and health characteristics. Missing values and SF-36 scores for telephone respondents at Survey 2 were imputed from SF-36 mail responses and telephone and mail responses to socio-demographic and health questions. Results: At Survey 2, self-rated health improved for telephone respondents but not mail respondents. After adjustment, mean changes in physical health and mental health scores remained higher (0.4 and 1.6 respectively) for telephone respondents compared with mail respondents (-1.2 and 0.1 respectively). Multiple imputation yielded adjusted changes in SF-36 scores that were similar for telephone and mail respondents. Conclusions and Implications: The effect of mode of administration on the change in mental health is important given that a difference of two points in SF-36 scores is accepted as clinically meaningful. Health evaluators should be aware of and adjust for the effects of mode of administration on self-rated health. Multiple imputation is one method that may be used to adjust SF-36 scores for mode of administration bias.

An advanced regularization methodology for use in watershed model calibration

A calibration methodology based on an efficient and stable mathematical regularization scheme is described. This scheme is a variant of so-called Tikhonov regularization in which the parameter estimation process is formulated as a constrained minimization problem. Use of the methodology eliminates the need for a modeler to formulate a parsimonious inverse problem in which a handful of parameters are designated for estimation prior to initiating the calibration process. Instead, the level of parameter parsimony required to achieve a stable solution to the inverse problem is determined by the inversion algorithm itself. Where parameters, or combinations of parameters, cannot be uniquely estimated, they are provided with values, or assigned relationships with other parameters, that are decreed to be realistic by the modeler. Conversely, where the information content of a calibration dataset is sufficient to allow estimates to be made of the values of many parameters, the making of such estimates is not precluded by preemptive parsimonizing ahead of the calibration process. White Tikhonov schemes are very attractive and hence widely used, problems with numerical stability can sometimes arise because the strength with which regularization constraints are applied throughout the regularized inversion process cannot be guaranteed to exactly complement inadequacies in the information content of a given calibration dataset. A new technique overcomes this problem by allowing relative regularization weights to be estimated as parameters through the calibration process itself. The technique is applied to the simultaneous calibration of five subwatershed models, and it is demonstrated that the new scheme results in a more efficient inversion, and better enforcement of regularization constraints than traditional Tikhonov regularization methodologies. Moreover, it is argued that a joint calibration exercise of this type results in a more meaningful set of parameters than can be achieved by individual subwatershed model calibration. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.