Cargando…

Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference

BACKGROUND: When analysing spatial data, it is important to account for spatial autocorrelation. In Bayesian statistics, spatial autocorrelation is commonly modelled by the intrinsic conditional autoregressive prior distribution. At the heart of this model is a spatial weights matrix which controls...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Duncan, Earl W., White, Nicole M., Mengersen, Kerrie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5732501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12942-017-0120-x
_version_ 1783286712148951040
author Duncan, Earl W.
White, Nicole M.
Mengersen, Kerrie
author_facet Duncan, Earl W.
White, Nicole M.
Mengersen, Kerrie
author_sort Duncan, Earl W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: When analysing spatial data, it is important to account for spatial autocorrelation. In Bayesian statistics, spatial autocorrelation is commonly modelled by the intrinsic conditional autoregressive prior distribution. At the heart of this model is a spatial weights matrix which controls the behaviour and degree of spatial smoothing. The purpose of this study is to review the main specifications of the spatial weights matrix found in the literature, and together with some new and less common specifications, compare the effect that they have on smoothing and model performance. METHODS: The popular BYM model is described, and a simple solution for addressing the identifiability issue among the spatial random effects is provided. Seventeen different definitions of the spatial weights matrix are defined, which are classified into four classes: adjacency-based weights, and weights based on geographic distance, distance between covariate values, and a hybrid of geographic and covariate distances. These last two definitions embody the main novelty of this research. Three synthetic data sets are generated, each representing a different underlying spatial structure. These data sets together with a real spatial data set from the literature are analysed using the models. The models are evaluated using the deviance information criterion and Moran’s I statistic. RESULTS: The deviance information criterion indicated that the model which uses binary, first-order adjacency weights to perform spatial smoothing is generally an optimal choice for achieving a good model fit. Distance-based weights also generally perform quite well and offer similar parameter interpretations. The less commonly explored options for performing spatial smoothing generally provided a worse model fit than models with more traditional approaches to smoothing, but usually outperformed the benchmark model which did not conduct spatial smoothing. CONCLUSIONS: The specification of the spatial weights matrix can have a colossal impact on model fit and parameter estimation. The results provide some evidence that a smaller number of neighbours used in defining the spatial weights matrix yields a better model fit, and may provide a more accurate representation of the underlying spatial random field. The commonly used binary, first-order adjacency weights still appear to be a good choice for implementing spatial smoothing. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12942-017-0120-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5732501
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57325012017-12-21 Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference Duncan, Earl W. White, Nicole M. Mengersen, Kerrie Int J Health Geogr Methodology BACKGROUND: When analysing spatial data, it is important to account for spatial autocorrelation. In Bayesian statistics, spatial autocorrelation is commonly modelled by the intrinsic conditional autoregressive prior distribution. At the heart of this model is a spatial weights matrix which controls the behaviour and degree of spatial smoothing. The purpose of this study is to review the main specifications of the spatial weights matrix found in the literature, and together with some new and less common specifications, compare the effect that they have on smoothing and model performance. METHODS: The popular BYM model is described, and a simple solution for addressing the identifiability issue among the spatial random effects is provided. Seventeen different definitions of the spatial weights matrix are defined, which are classified into four classes: adjacency-based weights, and weights based on geographic distance, distance between covariate values, and a hybrid of geographic and covariate distances. These last two definitions embody the main novelty of this research. Three synthetic data sets are generated, each representing a different underlying spatial structure. These data sets together with a real spatial data set from the literature are analysed using the models. The models are evaluated using the deviance information criterion and Moran’s I statistic. RESULTS: The deviance information criterion indicated that the model which uses binary, first-order adjacency weights to perform spatial smoothing is generally an optimal choice for achieving a good model fit. Distance-based weights also generally perform quite well and offer similar parameter interpretations. The less commonly explored options for performing spatial smoothing generally provided a worse model fit than models with more traditional approaches to smoothing, but usually outperformed the benchmark model which did not conduct spatial smoothing. CONCLUSIONS: The specification of the spatial weights matrix can have a colossal impact on model fit and parameter estimation. The results provide some evidence that a smaller number of neighbours used in defining the spatial weights matrix yields a better model fit, and may provide a more accurate representation of the underlying spatial random field. The commonly used binary, first-order adjacency weights still appear to be a good choice for implementing spatial smoothing. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12942-017-0120-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5732501/ /pubmed/29246157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12942-017-0120-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Duncan, Earl W.
White, Nicole M.
Mengersen, Kerrie
Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title_full Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title_fullStr Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title_full_unstemmed Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title_short Spatial smoothing in Bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
title_sort spatial smoothing in bayesian models: a comparison of weights matrix specifications and their impact on inference
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5732501/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12942-017-0120-x
work_keys_str_mv AT duncanearlw spatialsmoothinginbayesianmodelsacomparisonofweightsmatrixspecificationsandtheirimpactoninference
AT whitenicolem spatialsmoothinginbayesianmodelsacomparisonofweightsmatrixspecificationsandtheirimpactoninference
AT mengersenkerrie spatialsmoothinginbayesianmodelsacomparisonofweightsmatrixspecificationsandtheirimpactoninference