
doi: 10.2307/2533218
pmid: 8086610
Moment methods for analyzing repeated binary responses have been proposed by Liang and Zeger (1986, Biometrika 73, 13-22), and extended by Prentice (1988, Biometrics 44, 1033-1048). In their generalized estimating equations (GEE), both Liang and Zeger (1986) and Prentice (1988) estimate the parameters associated with the expected value of an individual's vector of binary responses as well as the correlations between pairs of binary responses. In this paper, we discuss one-step estimators, i.e., estimators obtained from one step of the generalized estimating equations, and compare their performance to that of the fully iterated estimators in small samples. In simulations, we find the performance of the one-step estimator to be qualitatively similar to that of the fully iterated estimator. When the sample size is small and the association between binary responses is high, we recommend using the one-step estimator to circumvent convergence problems associated with the fully iterated GEE algorithm. Furthermore, we find the GEE methods to be more efficient than ordinary logistic regression with variance correction for estimating the effect of a time-varying covariate.
Generalized linear models (logistic models), Analysis of Variance, Biometry, Models, Statistical, Estimation in multivariate analysis, Probabilistic methods, stochastic differential equations, Air Pollution, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Computer Simulation, Female, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Longitudinal Studies, Child, Algorithms, Respiratory Sounds
Generalized linear models (logistic models), Analysis of Variance, Biometry, Models, Statistical, Estimation in multivariate analysis, Probabilistic methods, stochastic differential equations, Air Pollution, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Computer Simulation, Female, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Longitudinal Studies, Child, Algorithms, Respiratory Sounds
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 178 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
