A BAYESIAN SHRINKAGE MODEL FOR INCOMPLETE LONGITUDINAL BINARY DATA WITH APPLICATION TO THE BREAST CANCER PREVENTION TRIAL

We consider inference in randomized studies, in which repeatedly measured outcomes may be informatively missing due to drop out. In this setting, it is well known that full data estimands are not identified unless unverified assumptions are imposed. We assume a non-future dependence model for the drop-out mechanism and posit an exponential tilt model that links non-identifiable and identifiable distributions. This model is indexed by non-identified parameters, which are assumed to have an informative prior distribution, elicited from subject-matter experts. Under this model, full data estimands are shown to be expressed as functionals of the distribution of the observed data. To avoid the curse of dimensionality, we model the distribution of the observed data using a Bayesian shrinkage model. In a simulation study, we compare our approach to a fully parametric and a fully saturated model for the distribution of the observed data. Our methodology is motivated and applied to data from the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial.

Marginal Structural Models for Partial Exposure Regimes

Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are ell known to be highly susceptible for nosocomial (i.e. hospital-acquired) infections due to their poor health and many invasive therapeutic treatments. The effects of acquiring such infections in ICU on mortality are however ill understood. Our goal is to quantify these effects using data from the National Surveillance Study of Nosocomial Infections in Intensive Care Units (Belgium). This is a challenging problem because of the presence of time-dependent confounders (such as exposure to mechanical ventilation)which lie on the causal path from infection to mortality. Standard statistical analyses may be severely misleading in such settings and have shown contradicting results. While inverse probability weighting for marginal structural models can be used to accommodate time-dependent confounders, inference for the effect of ?ICU acquired infections on mortality under such models is further complicated (a) by the fact that marginal structural models infer the effect of acquiring infection on a given, fixed day ?in ICU?, which is not well defined when ICU discharge comes prior to that day; (b) by informative censoring of the survival time due to hospital discharge; and (c) by the instability of the inverse weighting estimation procedure. We accommodate these problems by developing inference under a new class of marginal structural models which describe the hazard of death for patients if, possibly contrary to fact, they stayed in the ICU for at least a given number of days s and acquired infection or not on that day. Using these models we estimate that, if patients stayed in the ICU for at least s days, the effect of acquiring infection on day s would be to multiply the subsequent hazard of death by 2.74 (95 per cent conservative CI 1.48; 5.09).

Analyzing Panel Count Data with Informative Observation Times

In this paper, we study panel count data with informative observation times. We assume nonparametric and semiparametric proportional rate models for the underlying recurrent event process, where the form of the baseline rate function is left unspecified and a subject-specific frailty variable inflates or deflates the rate function multiplicatively. The proposed models allow the recurrent event processes and observation times to be correlated through their connections with the unobserved frailty; moreover, the distributions of both the frailty variable and observation times are considered as nuisance parameters. The baseline rate function and the regression parameters are estimated by maximizing a conditional likelihood function of observed event counts and solving estimation equations. Large sample properties of the proposed estimators are studied. Numerical studies demonstrate that the proposed estimation procedures perform well for moderate sample sizes. An application to a bladder tumor study is presented to illustrate the use of the proposed methods.

ASSESSING THE UNRELIABILITY OF THE MEDICAL LITERATURE: A RESPONSE TO "WHY MOST PUBLISHED RESEARCH FINDINGS ARE FALSE"

A recent article in this journal (Ioannidis JP (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2: e124) argued that more than half of published research findings in the medical literature are false. In this commentary, we examine the structure of that argument, and show that it has three basic components: 1)An assumption that the prior probability of most hypotheses explored in medical research is below 50%. 2)Dichotomization of P-values at the 0.05 level and introduction of a “bias” factor (produced by significance-seeking), the combination of which severely weakens the evidence provided by every design. 3)Use of Bayes theorem to show that, in the face of weak evidence, hypotheses with low prior probabilities cannot have posterior probabilities over 50%. Thus, the claim is based on a priori assumptions that most tested hypotheses are likely to be false, and then the inferential model used makes it impossible for evidence from any study to overcome this handicap. We focus largely on step (2), explaining how the combination of dichotomization and “bias” dilutes experimental evidence, and showing how this dilution leads inevitably to the stated conclusion. We also demonstrate a fallacy in another important component of the argument –that papers in “hot” fields are more likely to produce false findings. We agree with the paper’s conclusions and recommendations that many medical research findings are less definitive than readers suspect, that P-values are widely misinterpreted, that bias of various forms is widespread, that multiple approaches are needed to prevent the literature from being systematically biased and the need for more data on the prevalence of false claims. But calculating the unreliability of the medical research literature, in whole or in part, requires more empirical evidence and different inferential models than were used. The claim that “most research findings are false for most research designs and for most fields” must be considered as yet unproven.

A BAYESIAN HIERARCHICAL MODEL FOR CONSTRAINED DISTRIBUTED LAG FUNCTIONS: ESTIMATING THE TIME COURSE OF HOSPITALIZATION ASSOCIATED WITH AIR POLLUTION EXPOSURE

Numerous time series studies have provided strong evidence of an association between increased levels of ambient air pollution and increased levels of hospital admissions, typically at 0, 1, or 2 days after an air pollution episode. An important research aim is to extend existing statistical models so that a more detailed understanding of the time course of hospitalization after exposure to air pollution can be obtained. Information about this time course, combined with prior knowledge about biological mechanisms, could provide the basis for hypotheses concerning the mechanism by which air pollution causes disease. Previous studies have identified two important methodological questions: (1) How can we estimate the shape of the distributed lag between increased air pollution exposure and increased mortality or morbidity? and (2) How should we estimate the cumulative population health risk from short-term exposure to air pollution? Distributed lag models are appropriate tools for estimating air pollution health effects that may be spread over several days. However, estimation for distributed lag models in air pollution and health applications is hampered by the substantial noise in the data and the inherently weak signal that is the target of investigation. We introduce an hierarchical Bayesian distributed lag model that incorporates prior information about the time course of pollution effects and combines information across multiple locations. The model has a connection to penalized spline smoothing using a special type of penalty matrix. We apply the model to estimating the distributed lag between exposure to particulate matter air pollution and hospitalization for cardiovascular and respiratory disease using data from a large United States air pollution and hospitalization database of Medicare enrollees in 94 counties covering the years 1999-2002.