Robustness assessment of regressions using cluster analysis typologies: a bootstrap procedure with application in state sequence analysis.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1186/s12874-024-02435-8
Leonard Roth, Matthias Studer, Emilie Zuercher, Isabelle Peytremann-Bridevaux
{"title":"Robustness assessment of regressions using cluster analysis typologies: a bootstrap procedure with application in state sequence analysis.","authors":"Leonard Roth, Matthias Studer, Emilie Zuercher, Isabelle Peytremann-Bridevaux","doi":"10.1186/s12874-024-02435-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In standard Sequence Analysis, similar trajectories are clustered together to create a typology of trajectories, which is then often used to evaluate the association between sequence patterns and covariates inside regression models. The sampling uncertainty, which affects both the derivation of the typology and the associated regressions, is typically ignored in this analysis, an oversight that may lead to wrong statistical conclusions. We propose utilising sampling variation to derive new estimates that further inform on the association of interest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We introduce a novel procedure to assess the robustness of regression results obtained from the standard analysis. Bootstrap samples are drawn from the data, and for each bootstrap, a new typology replicating the original one is constructed, followed by the estimation of the corresponding regression models. The bootstrap estimates are then combined using a multilevel modelling framework that mimics a meta-analysis. The fitted values from this multilevel model allow to account for the sampling uncertainty in the inferential analysis. We illustrate the methodology by applying it to the study of healthcare utilisation trajectories in a Swiss cohort of diabetic patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The procedure provides robust estimates for an association of interest, along with 95% prediction intervals, representing the range of expected values if the clustering and associated regressions were performed on a new sample from the same underlying distribution. It also identifies central and borderline trajectories within each cluster. Regarding the illustrative application, while there was evidence of an association between regular lipid testing and subsequent healthcare utilisation patterns in the original analysis, this is not supported in the robustness assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Investigating the relationship between trajectory patterns and covariates is of interest in many situations. However, it is a challenging task with potential pitfalls. Our Robustness Assessment of Regression using Cluster Analysis Typologies (RARCAT) may assist in ensuring the robustness of such association studies. The method is applicable wherever clustering is combined with regression analysis, so its relevance goes beyond State Sequence Analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"24 1","pages":"303"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11654397/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-024-02435-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In standard Sequence Analysis, similar trajectories are clustered together to create a typology of trajectories, which is then often used to evaluate the association between sequence patterns and covariates inside regression models. The sampling uncertainty, which affects both the derivation of the typology and the associated regressions, is typically ignored in this analysis, an oversight that may lead to wrong statistical conclusions. We propose utilising sampling variation to derive new estimates that further inform on the association of interest.

Methods: We introduce a novel procedure to assess the robustness of regression results obtained from the standard analysis. Bootstrap samples are drawn from the data, and for each bootstrap, a new typology replicating the original one is constructed, followed by the estimation of the corresponding regression models. The bootstrap estimates are then combined using a multilevel modelling framework that mimics a meta-analysis. The fitted values from this multilevel model allow to account for the sampling uncertainty in the inferential analysis. We illustrate the methodology by applying it to the study of healthcare utilisation trajectories in a Swiss cohort of diabetic patients.

Results: The procedure provides robust estimates for an association of interest, along with 95% prediction intervals, representing the range of expected values if the clustering and associated regressions were performed on a new sample from the same underlying distribution. It also identifies central and borderline trajectories within each cluster. Regarding the illustrative application, while there was evidence of an association between regular lipid testing and subsequent healthcare utilisation patterns in the original analysis, this is not supported in the robustness assessment.

Conclusions: Investigating the relationship between trajectory patterns and covariates is of interest in many situations. However, it is a challenging task with potential pitfalls. Our Robustness Assessment of Regression using Cluster Analysis Typologies (RARCAT) may assist in ensuring the robustness of such association studies. The method is applicable wherever clustering is combined with regression analysis, so its relevance goes beyond State Sequence Analysis.

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
使用聚类分析类型学的回归稳健性评估:一个在状态序列分析中应用的自举过程。
背景:在标准序列分析中,相似的轨迹被聚集在一起以创建轨迹的类型,然后通常用于评估回归模型中序列模式和协变量之间的关联。抽样的不确定性会影响类型学的推导和相关的回归,在这种分析中通常被忽略,这种疏忽可能导致错误的统计结论。我们建议利用抽样变化来得出新的估计,以进一步了解兴趣关联。方法:我们引入了一种新的方法来评估从标准分析中获得的回归结果的稳健性。从数据中提取Bootstrap样本,对于每个Bootstrap,构建一个复制原始类型的新类型,然后对相应的回归模型进行估计。然后使用模拟元分析的多级建模框架将自举估计结合起来。该多层模型的拟合值考虑了推理分析中的抽样不确定性。我们通过将其应用于瑞士糖尿病患者队列中医疗保健利用轨迹的研究来说明该方法。结果:该程序为感兴趣的关联提供了稳健的估计,以及95%的预测区间,如果对来自相同底层分布的新样本进行聚类和相关回归,则表示期望值的范围。它还确定每个集群内的中心和边界轨迹。关于说明性应用,虽然在原始分析中有证据表明定期脂质测试与随后的医疗保健利用模式之间存在关联,但这在稳健性评估中没有得到支持。结论:在许多情况下,研究轨迹模式和协变量之间的关系是有意义的。然而,这是一项具有挑战性的任务,有潜在的陷阱。我们使用聚类分析类型学(RARCAT)对回归的稳健性评估可能有助于确保此类关联研究的稳健性。该方法适用于聚类与回归分析相结合的任何地方,因此它的相关性超越了状态序列分析。
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
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
期刊最新文献
A generative model for evaluating missing data methods in large epidemiological cohorts. Discrepancies in safety reporting for chronic back pain clinical trials: an observational study from ClinicalTrials.gov and publications. Multiple states clustering analysis (MSCA), an unsupervised approach to multiple time-to-event electronic health records applied to multimorbidity associated with myocardial infarction. Matching plus regression adjustment for the estimation of the average treatment effect on survival outcomes: a case study with mosunetuzumab in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Protocol publication rate and comparison between article, registry and protocol in RCTs.
×
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