Estimating parameters in Markov models for longitudinal studies with missing data or surrogate outcomes

The discrete-time Markov chain is commonly used in describing changes of health states for chronic diseases in a longitudinal study. Statistical inferences on comparing treatment effects or on finding determinants of disease progression usually require estimation of transition probabilities. In many situations when the outcome data have some missing observations or the variable of interest (called a latent variable) can not be measured directly, the estimation of transition probabilities becomes more complicated. In the latter case, a surrogate variable that is easier to access and can gauge the characteristics of the latent one is usually used for data analysis. ^ This dissertation research proposes methods to analyze longitudinal data (1) that have categorical outcome with missing observations or (2) that use complete or incomplete surrogate observations to analyze the categorical latent outcome. For (1), different missing mechanisms were considered for empirical studies using methods that include EM algorithm, Monte Carlo EM and a procedure that is not a data augmentation method. For (2), the hidden Markov model with the forward-backward procedure was applied for parameter estimation. This method was also extended to cover the computation of standard errors. The proposed methods were demonstrated by the Schizophrenia example. The relevance of public health, the strength and limitations, and possible future research were also discussed. ^

Selection bias and the cross-validation of regression models for prediction

Strategies are compared for the development of a linear regression model with stochastic (multivariate normal) regressor variables and the subsequent assessment of its predictive ability. Bias and mean squared error of four estimators of predictive performance are evaluated in simulated samples of 32 population correlation matrices. Models including all of the available predictors are compared with those obtained using selected subsets. The subset selection procedures investigated include two stopping rules, C$\sb{\rm p}$ and S$\sb{\rm p}$, each combined with an 'all possible subsets' or 'forward selection' of variables. The estimators of performance utilized include parametric (MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$) and non-parametric (PRESS) assessments in the entire sample, and two data splitting estimates restricted to a random or balanced (Snee's DUPLEX) 'validation' half sample. The simulations were performed as a designed experiment, with population correlation matrices representing a broad range of data structures.^ The techniques examined for subset selection do not generally result in improved predictions relative to the full model. Approaches using 'forward selection' result in slightly smaller prediction errors and less biased estimators of predictive accuracy than 'all possible subsets' approaches but no differences are detected between the performances of C$\sb{\rm p}$ and S$\sb{\rm p}$. In every case, prediction errors of models obtained by subset selection in either of the half splits exceed those obtained using all predictors and the entire sample.^ Only the random split estimator is conditionally (on $\\beta$) unbiased, however MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$ is unbiased on average and PRESS is nearly so in unselected (fixed form) models. When subset selection techniques are used, MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$ and PRESS always underestimate prediction errors, by as much as 27 percent (on average) in small samples. Despite their bias, the mean squared errors (MSE) of these estimators are at least 30 percent less than that of the unbiased random split estimator. The DUPLEX split estimator suffers from large MSE as well as bias, and seems of little value within the context of stochastic regressor variables.^ To maximize predictive accuracy while retaining a reliable estimate of that accuracy, it is recommended that the entire sample be used for model development, and a leave-one-out statistic (e.g. PRESS) be used for assessment. ^