Negative variance components and intercept-slope correlations greater than one in magnitude: How do such "non-regular" random intercept and slope models arise, and what should be done when they do?

被引:1
作者
Bridge, Helen [1 ]
Morgan, Katy E. [2 ]
Frost, Chris [2 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Alumna, London, England
[2] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Med Stat, London, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
boundary problems; improper solutions; mixed models; non-positive semidefinite covariance matrices; random slopes; singular fit;
D O I
10.1002/sim.10070
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Statistical models with random intercepts and slopes (RIAS models) are commonly used to analyze longitudinal data. Fitting such models sometimes results in negative estimates of variance components or estimates on parameter space boundaries. This can be an unlucky chance occurrence, but can also occur because certain marginal distributions are mathematically identical to those from RIAS models with negative intercept and/or slope variance components and/or intercept-slope correlations greater than one in magnitude. We term such parameters "pseudo-variances" and "pseudo-correlations," and the models "non-regular." We use eigenvalue theory to explore how and when such non-regular RIAS models arise, showing: (i) A small number of measurements, short follow-up, and large residual variance increase the parameter space for which data (with a positive semidefinite marginal variance-covariance matrix) are compatible with non-regular RIAS models. (ii) Non-regular RIAS models can arise from model misspecification, when non-linearity in fixed effects is ignored or when random effects are omitted. (iii) A non-regular RIAS model can sometimes be interpreted as a regular linear mixed model with one or more additional random effects, which may not be identifiable from the data. (iv) Particular parameterizations of non-regular RIAS models have no generality for all possible numbers of measurements over time. Because of this lack of generality, we conclude that non-regular RIAS models can only be regarded as plausible data-generating mechanisms in some situations. Nevertheless, fitting a non-regular RIAS model can be acceptable, allowing unbiased inference on fixed effects where commonly recommended alternatives such as dropping the random slope result in bias.
引用
收藏
页码:2747 / 2764
页数:18
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   A solution to dependency: using multilevel analysis to accommodate nested data [J].
Aarts, Emmeke ;
Verhage, Matthijs ;
Veenvliet, Jesse V. ;
Dolan, Conor V. ;
van der Sluis, Sophie .
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 17 (04) :491-496
[2]   Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal [J].
Barr, Dale J. ;
Levy, Roger ;
Scheepers, Christoph ;
Tily, Harry J. .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2013, 68 (03) :255-278
[3]   Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 [J].
Bates, Douglas ;
Maechler, Martin ;
Bolker, Benjamin M. ;
Walker, Steven C. .
JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL SOFTWARE, 2015, 67 (01) :1-48
[4]   Assessing an Alternative for "Negative Variance Components": A Gentle Introduction to Bayesian Covariance Structure Modeling for Negative Associations Among Patients With Personalized Treatments [J].
Fox, Jean-Paul ;
Smink, Wouter A. C. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2023, 28 (01) :1-20
[5]   Multiple imputation for model checking: Completed-data plots with missing and latent data [J].
Gelman, A ;
Van Mechelen, I ;
Verbeke, G ;
Heitjan, DF ;
Meulders, M .
BIOMETRICS, 2005, 61 (01) :74-85
[6]   IMPROPER SOLUTIONS IN THE ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE-STRUCTURES - THEIR INTERPRETABILITY AND A COMPARISON OF ALTERNATE RESPECIFICATIONS [J].
GERBING, DW ;
ANDERSON, JC .
PSYCHOMETRIKA, 1987, 52 (01) :99-111
[7]   Should I use fixed effects or random effects when I have fewer than five levels of a grouping factor in a mixed-effects model? [J].
Gomes, Dylan G. E. .
PEERJ, 2022, 10
[8]   A brief introduction to mixed effects modelling and multi-model inference in ecology [J].
Harrison, Xavier A. ;
Donaldson, Lynda ;
Correa-Cano, Maria Eugenia ;
Evans, Julian ;
Fisher, David N. ;
Goodwin, Cecily Ed ;
Robinson, Beth S. ;
Hodgson, David J. ;
Inger, Richard .
PEERJ, 2018, 6
[9]   A comparison of observation-level random effect and Beta-Binomial models for modelling overdispersion in Binomial data in ecology & evolution [J].
Harrison, Xavier A. .
PEERJ, 2015, 3
[10]   The statistical analysis of data from small groups [J].
Kenny, DA ;
Mannetti, L ;
Pierro, A ;
Livi, S ;
Kashy, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 83 (01) :126-137