Joint modelling of longitudinal data: a scoping review of methodology and applications for non-time to event data.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1186/s12874-025-02485-6
Rehema K Ouko, Mavuto Mukaka, Eric O Ohuma
{"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":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","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.

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
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
Joint modelling of longitudinal data: a scoping review of methodology and applications for non-time to event data. Patient partner engagement in the publication process: challenges and possible solutions. An algorithm to assess importance of predictors in systematic reviews of prediction models: a case study with simulations. The reliance on conceptual frameworks in qualitative research - a way forward. A doubly robust estimator for continuous treatments in high dimensions.
×
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