{"title":"Joint modelling of longitudinal data: a scoping review of methodology and applications for non-time to event data.","authors":"Rehema K Ouko, Mavuto Mukaka, Eric O Ohuma","doi":"10.1186/s12874-025-02485-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Joint models are powerful statistical models that allow us to define a joint likelihood for quantifying the association between two or more outcomes. Joint modelling has been shown to reduce bias in parameter estimates, increase the efficiency of statistical inference by incorporating the correlation between measurements, and allow borrowing of information in cases where data is missing for variables of interest. Most joint modelling methods and applications involve time-to-event data. There is less awareness about the amount of literature available for joint models of non-time-to-event data. Therefore, this review's main objective is to summarise the current state of joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a search in PubMed, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for articles published up to 28 January 2024. Studies were included if they focused on joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data and published in English. Exclusions were made for time-to-event articles, conference abstracts, book chapters, and studies without full text. We extracted information on statistical methods, association structure, estimation methods, software, etc. RESULTS: We identified 4,681 studies from the search. After removing 2,769 duplicates, 1,912 were reviewed by title and abstract, and 190 underwent full-text review. Ultimately, 74 studies met inclusion criteria and spanned from 2001 to 2024, with the majority (64 studies; 86%) published between 2014 and 2024. Most joint models were based on a frequentist approach (48 studies; 65%) and applied a linear mixed-effects model. The random effect was the most commonly applied association structure for linking two sub-models (63 studies; 85%). Estimation of model parameters was commonly done using Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Gibbs sampler algorithm (10 studies; 38%) for the Bayesian approach, whereas maximum likelihood was the most common (33 studies; 68.75%) for the frequentist approach. Most studies used R statistical software (33 studies; 40%) for analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A wide range of methods for joint-modelling non-time-to-event longitudinal data exist and have been applied to various areas. An exponential increase in the application of joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data has been observed in the last decade. There is an opportunity to leverage potential benefits of joint modelling for non-time-to-event longitudinal data for reducing bias in parameter estimates, increasing efficiency of statistical inference by incorporating the correlation between measurements, and allowing borrowing of information in cases with missing data.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"25 1","pages":"40"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11831847/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02485-6","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: Joint models are powerful statistical models that allow us to define a joint likelihood for quantifying the association between two or more outcomes. Joint modelling has been shown to reduce bias in parameter estimates, increase the efficiency of statistical inference by incorporating the correlation between measurements, and allow borrowing of information in cases where data is missing for variables of interest. Most joint modelling methods and applications involve time-to-event data. There is less awareness about the amount of literature available for joint models of non-time-to-event data. Therefore, this review's main objective is to summarise the current state of joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data.
Methods: We conducted a search in PubMed, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for articles published up to 28 January 2024. Studies were included if they focused on joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data and published in English. Exclusions were made for time-to-event articles, conference abstracts, book chapters, and studies without full text. We extracted information on statistical methods, association structure, estimation methods, software, etc. RESULTS: We identified 4,681 studies from the search. After removing 2,769 duplicates, 1,912 were reviewed by title and abstract, and 190 underwent full-text review. Ultimately, 74 studies met inclusion criteria and spanned from 2001 to 2024, with the majority (64 studies; 86%) published between 2014 and 2024. Most joint models were based on a frequentist approach (48 studies; 65%) and applied a linear mixed-effects model. The random effect was the most commonly applied association structure for linking two sub-models (63 studies; 85%). Estimation of model parameters was commonly done using Markov Chain Monte Carlo with Gibbs sampler algorithm (10 studies; 38%) for the Bayesian approach, whereas maximum likelihood was the most common (33 studies; 68.75%) for the frequentist approach. Most studies used R statistical software (33 studies; 40%) for analysis.
Conclusion: A wide range of methods for joint-modelling non-time-to-event longitudinal data exist and have been applied to various areas. An exponential increase in the application of joint modelling of non-time-to-event longitudinal data has been observed in the last decade. There is an opportunity to leverage potential benefits of joint modelling for non-time-to-event longitudinal data for reducing bias in parameter estimates, increasing efficiency of statistical inference by incorporating the correlation between measurements, and allowing borrowing of information in cases with missing data.
背景:联合模型是一种强大的统计模型,它允许我们定义一个联合似然来量化两个或多个结果之间的关联。联合建模已被证明可以减少参数估计中的偏差,通过结合测量之间的相关性来提高统计推断的效率,并允许在缺少感兴趣变量数据的情况下借用信息。大多数联合建模方法和应用都涉及到事件时间数据。对于非时间到事件数据的联合模型的可用文献数量,人们的认识较少。因此,本综述的主要目的是总结非时间到事件纵向数据联合建模的现状。方法:我们按照PRISMA-ScR指南在PubMed、Embase、Medline、Scopus和Web of Science中检索到2024年1月28日之前发表的文章。如果研究集中于非事件时间纵向数据的联合建模,并以英文发表,则纳入研究。排除了与事件相关的文章、会议摘要、书籍章节和没有全文的研究。我们提取了统计方法、关联结构、估计方法、软件等方面的信息。结果:我们从检索中确定了4681项研究。在删除2769个重复项后,通过标题和摘要对1912个进行了审查,190个进行了全文审查。最终,有74项研究符合纳入标准,时间跨度为2001年至2024年,其中大多数(64项研究;86%)出版于2014年至2024年间。大多数联合模型基于频率论方法(48项研究;65%),并应用线性混合效应模型。随机效应是连接两个子模型最常用的关联结构(63项研究;85%)。模型参数的估计通常使用马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗与吉布斯采样器算法(10项研究;38%),而最大似然是最常见的(33项研究;68.75%)。大多数研究使用R统计软件(33项研究;40%)进行分析。结论:存在广泛的非事件时间纵向数据联合建模方法,并已应用于各个领域。在过去十年中,观测到非事件时间纵向数据联合建模的应用呈指数增长。有机会利用非事件时间纵向数据联合建模的潜在好处,以减少参数估计中的偏差,通过结合测量之间的相关性提高统计推断的效率,并允许在数据缺失的情况下借用信息。
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.