Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1310.8176

Bayesian Regression Analysis of Data with Random Effects Covariates from Nonlinear Longitudinal Measurements

Rolando De la Cruz·Cristian Meza·Ana Arribas-Gil·Raymond J. Carroll
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Joint models for a wide class of response variables and longitudinal measurements consist on a mixed-effects model to fit longitudinal trajectories whose random effects enter as covariates in a generalized linear model for the primary response. They provide a useful way to asses association between these two kinds of data, which in clinical studies are often collected jointly on a series of individuals and may help understanding, for instance, the mechanisms of recovery of a certain disease or the efficacy of a given therapy. The most common joint model in this framework is based on a linear mixed model for the longitudinal data. However, for complex datasets the linearity assumption may be too restrictive. Some works have considered generalizing this setting with the use of a nonlinear mixed-effects model for the longitudinal trajectories but the proposed estimation procedures based on likelihood approximations have been shown De la Cruz et al. (2011) to exhibit some computational efficiency problems. In this article we propose an MCMC-based estimation procedure in the joint model with a nonlinear mixed-effects model for the longitudinal data and a generalized linear model for the primary response. Moreover, we consider that the errors in the longitudinal model may be correlated. We apply our method to the analysis of hormone levels measured at the early stages of pregnancy that can be used to predict normal versus abnormal pregnancy outcomes. We also conduct a simulation study to asses the importance of modelling correlated errors and quantify the consequences of model misspecification.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Rolando De la Cruz, Cristian Meza, Ana Arribas-Gil, Raymond J. Carroll. 2014-07-02. Bayesian Regression Analysis of Data with Random Effects Covariates from Nonlinear Longitudinal Measurements. https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.8176

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗