Social patterning in bed-sharing behaviour A longitudinal latent class analysis (LLCA)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
G Lecture 10 SEM methods revisited Multilevel models revisited
Advertisements

Lecture 11 (Chapter 9).
© Department of Statistics 2012 STATS 330 Lecture 32: Slide 1 Stats 330: Lecture 32.
Brief introduction on Logistic Regression
Logistic Regression Psy 524 Ainsworth.
Random effects as latent variables: SEM for repeated measures data Dr Patrick Sturgis University of Surrey.
Mixture modelling of continuous variables. Mixture modelling So far we have dealt with mixture modelling for a selection of binary or ordinal variables.
Lecture 16: Logistic Regression: Goodness of Fit Information Criteria ROC analysis BMTRY 701 Biostatistical Methods II.
SC968: Panel Data Methods for Sociologists Random coefficients models.
Lecture 4 (Chapter 4). Linear Models for Correlated Data We aim to develop a general linear model framework for longitudinal data, in which the inference.
1 BINARY CHOICE MODELS: LOGIT ANALYSIS The linear probability model may make the nonsense predictions that an event will occur with probability greater.
1 BINARY CHOICE MODELS: PROBIT ANALYSIS In the case of probit analysis, the sigmoid function F(Z) giving the probability is the cumulative standardized.
Data Handling & Analysis Polynomials and model fit Andrew Jackson
Some Terms Y =  o +  1 X Regression of Y on X Regress Y on X X called independent variable or predictor variable or covariate or factor Which factors.
Section 4.2 Fitting Curves and Surfaces by Least Squares.
Maximum likelihood estimates What are they and why do we care? Relationship to AIC and other model selection criteria.
x – independent variable (input)
In previous lecture, we highlighted 3 shortcomings of the LPM. The most serious one is the unboundedness problem, i.e., the LPM may make the nonsense predictions.
1 BA 275 Quantitative Business Methods Residual Analysis Multiple Linear Regression Adjusted R-squared Prediction Dummy Variables Agenda.
BCOR 1020 Business Statistics Lecture 28 – May 1, 2008.
Lecture 24: Thurs. Dec. 4 Extra sum of squares F-tests (10.3) R-squared statistic (10.4.1) Residual plots (11.2) Influential observations (11.3,
EPI 809/Spring Multiple Logistic Regression.
In previous lecture, we dealt with the unboundedness problem of LPM using the logit model. In this lecture, we will consider another alternative, i.e.
Log-linear analysis Summary. Focus on data analysis Focus on underlying process Focus on model specification Focus on likelihood approach Focus on ‘complete-data.
Review for Exam 2 Some important themes from Chapters 6-9 Chap. 6. Significance Tests Chap. 7: Comparing Two Groups Chap. 8: Contingency Tables (Categorical.
BINARY CHOICE MODELS: LOGIT ANALYSIS
Generalized Linear Models
C. Logit model, logistic regression, and log-linear model A comparison.
Mixture Modeling Chongming Yang Research Support Center FHSS College.
1 Binary Models 1 A (Longitudinal) Latent Class Analysis of Bedwetting.
Inference for regression - Simple linear regression
1 BINARY CHOICE MODELS: PROBIT ANALYSIS In the case of probit analysis, the sigmoid function is the cumulative standardized normal distribution.
Modelling non-independent random effects in multilevel models William Browne Harvey Goldstein University of Bristol.
Logit model, logistic regression, and log-linear model A comparison.
Categorical and Zero Inflated Growth Models Alan C. Acock* Summer, 2009 *Alan C. Acock, Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, Oregon State.
So far... We have been estimating differences caused by application of various treatments, and determining the probability that an observed difference.
HSRP 734: Advanced Statistical Methods June 19, 2008.
Lecture 3 Linear random intercept models. Example: Weight of Guinea Pigs Body weights of 48 pigs in 9 successive weeks of follow-up (Table 3.1 DLZ) The.
1 Parallel Models. 2 Model two separate processes which run in tandem Bedwetting and daytime wetting 5 time points: 4½, 5½, 6½,7½ & 9½ yrs Binary measures.
Single-Factor Studies KNNL – Chapter 16. Single-Factor Models Independent Variable can be qualitative or quantitative If Quantitative, we typically assume.
Going from data to analysis Dr. Nancy Mayo. Getting it right Research is about getting the right answer, not just an answer An answer is easy The right.
1 STA 617 – Chp11 Models for repeated data Analyzing Repeated Categorical Response Data  Repeated categorical responses may come from  repeated measurements.
SEM Basics 2 Byrne Chapter 2 Kline pg 7-15, 50-51, ,
Discrepancy between Data and Fit. Introduction What is Deviance? Deviance for Binary Responses and Proportions Deviance as measure of the goodness of.
1 G Lect 7a G Lecture 7a Comparing proportions from independent samples Analysis of matched samples Small samples and 2  2 Tables Strength.
1 Binary models 2 LCGA model of frequent bedwetting + tests of gender invariance.
Chapter 15 The Chi-Square Statistic: Tests for Goodness of Fit and Independence PowerPoint Lecture Slides Essentials of Statistics for the Behavioral.
University Rennes 2, CRPCC, EA 1285
Statistics 2: generalized linear models. General linear model: Y ~ a + b 1 * x 1 + … + b n * x n + ε There are many cases when general linear models are.
Qualitative and Limited Dependent Variable Models ECON 6002 Econometrics Memorial University of Newfoundland Adapted from Vera Tabakova’s notes.
Exploring social mobility with latent trajectory group analysis Patrick Sturgis, University of Southampton and National Centre for Research Methods From.
Cross-sectional LCA Patterns of first response to cigarettes.
1 Ordinal Models. 2 Estimating gender-specific LLCA with repeated ordinal data Examining the effect of time invariant covariates on class membership The.
Birthweight (gms) BPDNProp Total BPD (Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia) by birth weight Proportion.
1 BINARY CHOICE MODELS: LOGIT ANALYSIS The linear probability model may make the nonsense predictions that an event will occur with probability greater.
Hypothesis Testing and Statistical Significance
Chapter 11: Categorical Data n Chi-square goodness of fit test allows us to examine a single distribution of a categorical variable in a population. n.
Class Seven Turn In: Chapter 18: 32, 34, 36 Chapter 19: 26, 34, 44 Quiz 3 For Class Eight: Chapter 20: 18, 20, 24 Chapter 22: 34, 36 Read Chapters 23 &
Bivariate analysis. * Bivariate analysis studies the relation between 2 variables while assuming that other factors (other associated variables) would.
Patterns of first response to cigarettes
BINARY LOGISTIC REGRESSION
Logistic Regression APKC – STATS AFAC (2016).
Lecture 18 Matched Case Control Studies
Generalized Linear Models
Introduction to Logistic Regression
Problems with infinite solutions in logistic regression
Multivariate Methods Berlin Chen
Multivariate Methods Berlin Chen, 2005 References:
Nazmus Saquib, PhD Head of Research Sulaiman AlRajhi Colleges
Presentation transcript:

Social patterning in bed-sharing behaviour A longitudinal latent class analysis (LLCA)

Aim Examine proximal sleeping arrangements between parents and their infant/child in terms of –Potential influences on other care practices –Perceived benefits to parents/child Effect of bed-sharing practices on –Breastfeeding / pacifier use / infant well-being –Child development / behaviour / health / sleeping patterns –Maternal anxiety / bonding / sleep duration

Bed-sharing definition Not easy! –Occupants of the bed / the room and proximity to parents can change throughout the night / between different days of week Bed-sharer – if they usually shared a bed with an adult for nocturnal sleep (not nec. the parental bed) Bed-sharing took priority if a variety of practices were reported either between days or across the period of a single night

Rates of bed-sharing (n = 7447)

C/S association – t1 S-class | Not bed-sh Bed-sh | Total Lo | 3, | 3,780 | | Hi | 2, | 2,551 | | Total | 5, | 6,331 | | Pearson chi2(1) = Pr = 0.000

C/S association – t2 S-class | Not bed-sh Bed-sh | Total Lo | 3, | 3,780 | | Hi | 2, | 2,551 | | Total | 5, | 6,331 | | Pearson chi2(1) = Pr = 0.310

C/S association – t3 S-class | Not bed-sh Bed-sh | Total Lo | 3, | 3,780 | | Hi | 2, | 2,551 | | Total | 5,238 1,093 | 6,331 | | Pearson chi2(1) = Pr = 0.000

C/S association – t4 S-class | Not bed-sh Bed-sh | Total Lo | 2, | 3,780 | | Hi | 2, | 2,551 | | Total | 4,968 1,363 | 6,331 | | Pearson chi2(1) = Pr = 0.000

C/S association – t5 S-class | Not bed-sh Bed-sh | Total Lo | 2, | 3,780 | | Hi | 2, | 2,551 | | Total | 5,008 1,323 | 6,331 | | Pearson chi2(1) = Pr = 0.001

Model fit stats 1 class2 class3 class4 class5 class Estimated params H0 Likelihood aBIC Entropy Tech BLRT statistic BLRT p-value -< Note = aBIC still decreasing + entropy never particularly high

Class sizes FINAL CLASS COUNTS AND PROPORTIONS FOR THE LATENT CLASS PATTERNS BASED ON ESTIMATED POSTERIOR PROBABILITIES Latent classes CLASSIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS BASED ON MOST LIKELY LATENT CLASS MEMBERSHIP Latent classes

Entropy CLASSIFICATION QUALITY Entropy Average Latent Class Probabilities for Most Likely Latent Class Membership (Row) by Latent Class (Column)

Entropy CLASSIFICATION QUALITY Entropy Average Latent Class Probabilities for Most Likely Latent Class Membership (Row) by Latent Class (Column) Not a weighted average!!

Class 1 (16.7%) | bed_t1 bed_t2 bed_t3 bed_t4 bed_t5 p_c1 p_c2 p_c3 p_c4 num | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Class 2 (13.0%) | bed_t1 bed_t2 bed_t3 bed_t4 bed_t5 p_c1 p_c2 p_c3 p_c4 num | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Class 3 (63.9%) | bed_t1 bed_t2 bed_t3 bed_t4 bed_t5 p_c1 p_c2 p_c3 p_c4 num | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Class 4 (6.4%) | bed_t1 bed_t2 bed_t3 bed_t4 bed_t5 p_c1 p_c2 p_c3 p_c4 num | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

4-class model ‘trajectories’

Multinomial model Multinomial logistic regression Number of obs = 6331 LR chi2(3) = Prob > chi2 = Log likelihood = Pseudo R2 = class | RRR Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval] Always Bed-sh | Hi Soc Class | Early Bed-sh | Hi Soc Class | Late Bed-sh | Hi Soc Class | (class==Non Bed-share is the base outcome)

Latent Class Growth Analysis

T1T2T3T4T5 C Outcome Risk factors

T1T2T3T4T5 isq C Outcome Risk factors

Latent Class Growth Analysis Alternative to LLCA Fits polynomials on logit scale, not in probability space (more flexible than one might think) Recall that LLCA items thresholds also estimated on logit scale More parsimonius than LLCA (less parameters) Unlikely to capture some shapes e.g. a relapse

LCGA in Mplus Shorthand i s q | Longhand i by s by q by i s q]; i/s/q are factors defined by FIXING loadings onto the manifest variables In LCGA these growth factors are constant (zero variance) and are uncorrelated In GMM the growth factors have a variance, and are correlated with each other (Cor(i,s) ne 0)

Choosing the growth parameters With LLCA there are no choices to be made regarding how to describe/parameterize the ‘trajectories’ – they don’t really exist With LCGA you can fit: –4-class linear –4-class quadratic –4-class with two linear and two quadratic –4-class with 1 cubic, 1 quad, 1 linear, 1 constant –Etc.

Choosing the factor loadings We have five repeated measures 1, 6, 18, 30 and 42 months Options: i s q | i s q | i s q |

Effect of different choices (4 class) i s q | perturbed starting value run(s) did not converge. Final stage loglikelihood values at local maxima, seeds, and initial stage start numbers: ONE OR MORE MULTINOMIAL LOGIT PARAMETERS WERE FIXED TO AVOID SINGULARITY OF THE INFORMATION MATRIX. THE SINGULARITY IS MOST LIKELY BECAUSE THE MODEL IS NOT IDENTIFIED, OR BECAUSE OF EMPTY CELLS IN THE JOINT DISTRIBUTION OF THE CATEGORICAL LATENT VARIABLES AND ANY INDEPENDENT VARIABLES. THE FOLLOWING PARAMETERS WERE FIXED: 13 15

Effect of different choices (4 class) i s q | 21 perturbed starting value run(s) did not converge. Final stage loglikelihood values at local maxima, seeds, and initial stage start numbers: THE MODEL ESTIMATION TERMINATED NORMALLY

4-class MODEL RESULTS Two-Tailed Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. P-Value Latent Class 1 I | BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t S | BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t Q | BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t BEDS_t All fixed (not estimated)

4-class MODEL RESULTS Two-Tailed Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. P-Value Latent Class 1 Means I S Q Thresholds BEDS_t1$ BEDS_t2$ BEDS_t3$ BEDS_t4$ BEDS_t5$ Estimated + different across classes Estimated + equal across classes

4-class LCGA model

These are all quadratics!

Comparison with LLCA result LCGALLCA Entropy = aBIC = Entropy = aBIC =

Comparison with LLCA result LCGALLCA Entropy = aBIC = Entropy = aBIC = Curves may look similar(ish), but check class distribution and pattern assignment

Model fitting Aim is to find the simplest model which explains the data As with LCA, compare models with different classes Simplify polynomials if possible –Start with i/s/q and then constrain q terms to be zero if they are negligible

How constraints can get you out of a pickle 5-class model: ONE OR MORE PARAMETERS WERE FIXED TO AVOID SINGULARITY OF THE INFORMATION MATRIX. THE SINGULARITY IS MOST LIKELY BECAUSE THE MODEL IS NOT IDENTIFIED, OR BECAUSE OF EMPTY CELLS IN THE JOINT DISTRIBUTION OF THE CATEGORICAL VARIABLES IN THE MODEL. THE FOLLOWING PARAMETERS WERE FIXED: 10

Output: tech1; PARAMETER SPECIFICATION FOR LATENT CLASS INDICATOR GROWTH MODEL PART ALPHA(F) FOR LATENT CLASS 1 I S Q ________ ________ ________ ALPHA(F) FOR LATENT CLASS 2 I S Q ________ ________ ________ ALPHA(F) FOR LATENT CLASS 3 I S Q ________ ________ ________

Constrain a ‘q’ to be zero %OVERALL% i s q | %c#1% Then re-run the model – doesn’t always work!!!

Conclusions LLCA / LCGA can be fitted to repeated binary data LCGA uses less parameters but cannot capture all shapes so equivalent model may be more parsimonious but have poorer fit Output from both is posterior probabilities for class membership → weighted regression models