Cargando…

A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting

BACKGROUND: A common, important problem in spatial epidemiology is measuring and identifying variation in disease risk across a study region. In application of statistical methods, the problem has two parts. First, spatial variation in risk must be detected across the study region and, second, areas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Young, Robin L, Weinberg, Janice, Vieira, Verónica, Ozonoff, Al, Webster, Thomas F
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2918545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20642827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-9-37
_version_ 1782185119453282304
author Young, Robin L
Weinberg, Janice
Vieira, Verónica
Ozonoff, Al
Webster, Thomas F
author_facet Young, Robin L
Weinberg, Janice
Vieira, Verónica
Ozonoff, Al
Webster, Thomas F
author_sort Young, Robin L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A common, important problem in spatial epidemiology is measuring and identifying variation in disease risk across a study region. In application of statistical methods, the problem has two parts. First, spatial variation in risk must be detected across the study region and, second, areas of increased or decreased risk must be correctly identified. The location of such areas may give clues to environmental sources of exposure and disease etiology. One statistical method applicable in spatial epidemiologic settings is a generalized additive model (GAM) which can be applied with a bivariate LOESS smoother to account for geographic location as a possible predictor of disease status. A natural hypothesis when applying this method is whether residential location of subjects is associated with the outcome, i.e. is the smoothing term necessary? Permutation tests are a reasonable hypothesis testing method and provide adequate power under a simple alternative hypothesis. These tests have yet to be compared to other spatial statistics. RESULTS: This research uses simulated point data generated under three alternative hypotheses to evaluate the properties of the permutation methods and compare them to the popular spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting. Case 1 was a single circular cluster centered in a circular study region. The spatial scan statistic had the highest power though the GAM method estimates did not fall far behind. Case 2 was a single point source located at the center of a circular cluster and Case 3 was a line source at the center of the horizontal axis of a square study region. Each had linearly decreasing logodds with distance from the point. The GAM methods outperformed the scan statistic in Cases 2 and 3. Comparing sensitivity, measured as the proportion of the exposure source correctly identified as high or low risk, the GAM methods outperformed the scan statistic in all three Cases. CONCLUSIONS: The GAM permutation testing methods provide a regression-based alternative to the spatial scan statistic. Across all hypotheses examined in this research, the GAM methods had competing or greater power estimates and sensitivities exceeding that of the spatial scan statistic.
format Text
id pubmed-2918545
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29185452010-08-11 A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting Young, Robin L Weinberg, Janice Vieira, Verónica Ozonoff, Al Webster, Thomas F Int J Health Geogr Research BACKGROUND: A common, important problem in spatial epidemiology is measuring and identifying variation in disease risk across a study region. In application of statistical methods, the problem has two parts. First, spatial variation in risk must be detected across the study region and, second, areas of increased or decreased risk must be correctly identified. The location of such areas may give clues to environmental sources of exposure and disease etiology. One statistical method applicable in spatial epidemiologic settings is a generalized additive model (GAM) which can be applied with a bivariate LOESS smoother to account for geographic location as a possible predictor of disease status. A natural hypothesis when applying this method is whether residential location of subjects is associated with the outcome, i.e. is the smoothing term necessary? Permutation tests are a reasonable hypothesis testing method and provide adequate power under a simple alternative hypothesis. These tests have yet to be compared to other spatial statistics. RESULTS: This research uses simulated point data generated under three alternative hypotheses to evaluate the properties of the permutation methods and compare them to the popular spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting. Case 1 was a single circular cluster centered in a circular study region. The spatial scan statistic had the highest power though the GAM method estimates did not fall far behind. Case 2 was a single point source located at the center of a circular cluster and Case 3 was a line source at the center of the horizontal axis of a square study region. Each had linearly decreasing logodds with distance from the point. The GAM methods outperformed the scan statistic in Cases 2 and 3. Comparing sensitivity, measured as the proportion of the exposure source correctly identified as high or low risk, the GAM methods outperformed the scan statistic in all three Cases. CONCLUSIONS: The GAM permutation testing methods provide a regression-based alternative to the spatial scan statistic. Across all hypotheses examined in this research, the GAM methods had competing or greater power estimates and sensitivities exceeding that of the spatial scan statistic. BioMed Central 2010-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC2918545/ /pubmed/20642827 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-9-37 Text en Copyright ©2010 Young et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Young, Robin L
Weinberg, Janice
Vieira, Verónica
Ozonoff, Al
Webster, Thomas F
A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title_full A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title_fullStr A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title_full_unstemmed A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title_short A power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
title_sort power comparison of generalized additive models and the spatial scan statistic in a case-control setting
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2918545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20642827
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-9-37
work_keys_str_mv AT youngrobinl apowercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT weinbergjanice apowercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT vieiraveronica apowercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT ozonoffal apowercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT websterthomasf apowercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT youngrobinl powercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT weinbergjanice powercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT vieiraveronica powercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT ozonoffal powercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting
AT websterthomasf powercomparisonofgeneralizedadditivemodelsandthespatialscanstatisticinacasecontrolsetting