Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In situations in which one cannot specify a single primary outcome, epidemiologic analyses often examine multiple associations between outcomes and explanatory covariates or risk factors. To compare alternative approaches to the analysis of multiple outcomes in regression models, I used generalized estimating equations (GEE) models, a multivariate extension of generalized linear models, to incorporate the dependence among the outcomes from the same subject and to provide robust variance estimates of the regression coefficients. I applied the methods in a hospital-population-based study of complications of surgical anaesthesia, using GEE model fitting and quasi-likelihood score and Wald tests. In one GEE model specification, I allowed the associations between each of the outcomes and a covariate to differ, yielding a regression coefficient for each of the outcome and covariate combinations; I obtained the covariances among the set of outcome-specific regression coefficients for each covariate from the robust 'sandwich' variance estimator. To address the problem of multiple inference, I used simultaneous methods that make adjustments to the test statistic p-values and the confidence interval widths, to control type I error and simultaneous coverage, respectively. In a second model specification, for each of the covariates I assumed a common association between the outcomes and the covariate, which eliminates the problem of multiplicity by use of a global test of association. In an alternative approach to multiplicity, I used empirical Bayes methods to shrink the outcome-specific coefficients toward a pooled mean that is similar to the common effect coefficient. GEE regression models can provide a flexible framework for estimation and testing of multiple outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shelley B. Bull (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: