Extra option and explanatory variables in MM models
Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:56 am
Dear runmlwin users,
I have two questions with which I was hoping you could please help.
First, I am analysing data that could be described as count data and that exhibit over-dispersion. Thanks to Chris, I understand that the negative binomial distribution is not implemented currently in MLwiN when using MCMC estimation. I was wondering, therefore, whether an alternative to the negative binomial distribution would be estimating a Poisson model with the extra option. If so, I would appreciate any guidance/information on how to interpret the results of the model with the extra option. For instance, if the value of α is greater (less) than 1, does this indicate over- (under-) dispersion?
Second, I am attempting to estimate a multiple membership model where patients may be treated by more than one consultant, nested within hospitals. I have constructed the multiple membership unit identifiers (consultant1-consultant6) and the corresponding multiple membership weights. I would like to include consultant-level explanatory variables, but I’m not sure how this should be done. Should the order of the consultant-level explanatory variables be the same as that of the multiple membership unit identifiers? If so, some of the explanatory variables may then be repeated if, for example, consultant A is consultant1 for one patient, but consultant6 for another patient.
As always, any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks,
Jacqueline
I have two questions with which I was hoping you could please help.
First, I am analysing data that could be described as count data and that exhibit over-dispersion. Thanks to Chris, I understand that the negative binomial distribution is not implemented currently in MLwiN when using MCMC estimation. I was wondering, therefore, whether an alternative to the negative binomial distribution would be estimating a Poisson model with the extra option. If so, I would appreciate any guidance/information on how to interpret the results of the model with the extra option. For instance, if the value of α is greater (less) than 1, does this indicate over- (under-) dispersion?
Second, I am attempting to estimate a multiple membership model where patients may be treated by more than one consultant, nested within hospitals. I have constructed the multiple membership unit identifiers (consultant1-consultant6) and the corresponding multiple membership weights. I would like to include consultant-level explanatory variables, but I’m not sure how this should be done. Should the order of the consultant-level explanatory variables be the same as that of the multiple membership unit identifiers? If so, some of the explanatory variables may then be repeated if, for example, consultant A is consultant1 for one patient, but consultant6 for another patient.
As always, any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks,
Jacqueline