Least Squares and Robust Rank-Based Double Bootstrap Analyses for Time-Series Intervention Designs.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Evaluation & the Health Professions Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1177/01632787221119534
Shaofeng Zhang, Joseph W McKean, Bradley E Huitema
{"title":"Least Squares and Robust Rank-Based Double Bootstrap Analyses for Time-Series Intervention Designs.","authors":"Shaofeng Zhang,&nbsp;Joseph W McKean,&nbsp;Bradley E Huitema","doi":"10.1177/01632787221119534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Time-series intervention designs that include two or more phases have been widely discussed in the healthcare literature for many years. A convenient model for the analysis of these designs has a linear model part (to measure changes in level and trend) plus a second part that measures the random error structure; the error structure is assumed to follow an autoregressive time-series process. Traditional generalized linear model approaches widely used to estimate this model are less than satisfactory because they tend to provide substantially biased intervention tests and confidence intervals. We describe an updated version of the original double bootstrap approach that was developed by McKnight et al. (2000) to correct for this problem. This updated analysis and a new robust version were recently implemented in an <i>R</i> package (McKean & Zhang, 2018). The robust method is insensitive to outliers and problems associated with common departures from normality in the error distribution. Monte Carlo studies as well as published data are used to demonstrate the properties of both versions. The <i>R</i> code required to perform the analyses is provided and illustrated.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787221119534","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Time-series intervention designs that include two or more phases have been widely discussed in the healthcare literature for many years. A convenient model for the analysis of these designs has a linear model part (to measure changes in level and trend) plus a second part that measures the random error structure; the error structure is assumed to follow an autoregressive time-series process. Traditional generalized linear model approaches widely used to estimate this model are less than satisfactory because they tend to provide substantially biased intervention tests and confidence intervals. We describe an updated version of the original double bootstrap approach that was developed by McKnight et al. (2000) to correct for this problem. This updated analysis and a new robust version were recently implemented in an R package (McKean & Zhang, 2018). The robust method is insensitive to outliers and problems associated with common departures from normality in the error distribution. Monte Carlo studies as well as published data are used to demonstrate the properties of both versions. The R code required to perform the analyses is provided and illustrated.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
时间序列干预设计的最小二乘和基于稳健秩的双自举分析。
包括两个或更多阶段的时间序列干预设计已在医疗文献中广泛讨论多年。分析这些设计的一个方便的模型是线性模型部分(测量水平和趋势的变化)加上测量随机误差结构的第二部分;假设误差结构遵循自回归时间序列过程。广泛用于估计该模型的传统广义线性模型方法不太令人满意,因为它们往往提供严重偏置的干预检验和置信区间。我们描述了由McKnight等人(2000)开发的原始双引导方法的更新版本,以纠正这个问题。这个更新的分析和一个新的健壮版本最近在R包中实现(McKean & Zhang, 2018)。鲁棒方法对异常值和与误差分布中常见偏离正态相关的问题不敏感。蒙特卡罗研究和已发表的数据被用来证明这两个版本的特性。提供并说明了执行分析所需的R代码。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
期刊最新文献
The Use of Contribution Analysis in Evaluating Health Interventions: A Scoping Review. Impact of Multi-point Nursing Strategies Under a Clinical Problem-Solving Framework on Adverse Events Associated With Thyroid Nodule Resection. Real Patient Participation in Workplace-Based Assessment of Health Professional Trainees: A Scoping Review. The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of Self-Perceived Barriers for Physical Activity Questionnaire. Factors Associated With Agreement Between Parent and Childhood Cancer Survivor Reports on Child's Health Related Quality of Life.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1