A Comparison of Mean-Based and Quantile Regression Methods for Analyzing Self-Report Dietary Intake Data

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2019-03-03 DOI:10.1155/2019/9750538
Michelle L Vidoni, B. Reininger, Minjae Lee
{"title":"A Comparison of Mean-Based and Quantile Regression Methods for Analyzing Self-Report Dietary Intake Data","authors":"Michelle L Vidoni, B. Reininger, Minjae Lee","doi":"10.1155/2019/9750538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In mean-based approaches to dietary data analysis, it is possible for potentially important associations at the tails of the intake distribution, where inadequacy or excess is greatest, to be obscured due to unobserved heterogeneity. Participants in the upper or lower tails of dietary intake data will potentially have the greatest change in their behavior when presented with a health behavior intervention; thus, alternative statistical methods to modeling these relationships are needed to fully describe the impact of the intervention. Using data from Tu Salud ¡Si Cuenta! (Your Health Matters!) at Home Intervention, we aimed to compare traditional mean-based regression to quantile regression for describing the impact of a health behavior intervention on healthy and unhealthy eating indices. The mean-based regression model identified no differences in dietary intake between intervention and standard care groups. In contrast, the quantile regression indicated a nonconstant relationship between the unhealthy eating index and study groups at the upper tail of the unhealthy eating index distribution. The traditional mean-based linear regression was unable to fully describe the intervention effect on healthy and unhealthy eating, resulting in a limited understanding of the association.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2019/9750538","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9750538","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In mean-based approaches to dietary data analysis, it is possible for potentially important associations at the tails of the intake distribution, where inadequacy or excess is greatest, to be obscured due to unobserved heterogeneity. Participants in the upper or lower tails of dietary intake data will potentially have the greatest change in their behavior when presented with a health behavior intervention; thus, alternative statistical methods to modeling these relationships are needed to fully describe the impact of the intervention. Using data from Tu Salud ¡Si Cuenta! (Your Health Matters!) at Home Intervention, we aimed to compare traditional mean-based regression to quantile regression for describing the impact of a health behavior intervention on healthy and unhealthy eating indices. The mean-based regression model identified no differences in dietary intake between intervention and standard care groups. In contrast, the quantile regression indicated a nonconstant relationship between the unhealthy eating index and study groups at the upper tail of the unhealthy eating index distribution. The traditional mean-based linear regression was unable to fully describe the intervention effect on healthy and unhealthy eating, resulting in a limited understanding of the association.
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
基于均值回归和分位数回归分析自述饮食摄入数据的比较
在基于均值的饮食数据分析方法中,由于未观察到的异质性,摄入分布尾部的潜在重要关联可能会被掩盖,而摄入分布尾部的不足或过量是最大的。饮食摄入数据上尾或下尾的参与者在进行健康行为干预时,其行为可能发生最大的变化;因此,需要替代的统计方法来对这些关系进行建模,以充分描述干预的影响。使用Tu Salud ' Si Cuenta!(Your Health Matters!),我们旨在比较传统的基于均值的回归和分位数回归,以描述健康行为干预对健康和不健康饮食指数的影响。基于均值的回归模型确定干预组和标准护理组之间的饮食摄入量没有差异。相比之下,分位数回归显示,在不健康饮食指数分布的上尾,不健康饮食指数与研究组之间存在非恒定关系。传统的基于均值的线性回归无法完全描述健康和不健康饮食的干预效果,导致对这种关联的理解有限。
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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. Analysis of Medical Rehabilitation Needs of 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Victims: Adıyaman Example. Efficacy of whole body vibration on fascicle length and joint angle in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Clinical Practice Guidelines on Palliative Sedation Around the World: A Systematic Review.
×
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