2007
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Bayesian hierarchical modeling approach for studying the factors affecting the stage at diagnosis of prostate cancer

Abstract: We extend the baseline-category logits model for categorical response data to accommodate two distinct kinds of clustering. Our extension introduces random effects that have one component exhibiting spatial dependence and a second component that is distributed independently. We use this enhanced categorical logits model for investigating the factors that affect the geographical distribution of the diagnostic stage of prostate cancer (PrCA) in South Carolina (SC). Using incidence data from the SC registry, we f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The importance of creating maps that accurately describe disease spatial distribution patterns appeared to be a consensual issue (Kulldorff et al, 2006) though the method used to achieve this was not consensual. Some articles intended to define the best method for some type of analysis for some particular datasets by comparing the results of the application of different spatial analysis methods (Bailony et al, 2011;Biggeri et al, 2009;Chen et al, 2008a;Colonna, 2004;Dasgupta et al, 2014;Goovaerts, 2005Goovaerts, , 2006aHegarty et al, 2010;Huang et al, 2008;Kaldor and Clayton, 1989;Kulldorff et al, 2006;Meliker et al, 2009;Sherman et al, 2014;Sloan et al, 2012;Zhou et al, 2008b). Table 5 shows a classification of some of most common spatial issues covered by research papers, as well as methods used to answer them.…”
Section: Applied Methods In Data Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The importance of creating maps that accurately describe disease spatial distribution patterns appeared to be a consensual issue (Kulldorff et al, 2006) though the method used to achieve this was not consensual. Some articles intended to define the best method for some type of analysis for some particular datasets by comparing the results of the application of different spatial analysis methods (Bailony et al, 2011;Biggeri et al, 2009;Chen et al, 2008a;Colonna, 2004;Dasgupta et al, 2014;Goovaerts, 2005Goovaerts, , 2006aHegarty et al, 2010;Huang et al, 2008;Kaldor and Clayton, 1989;Kulldorff et al, 2006;Meliker et al, 2009;Sherman et al, 2014;Sloan et al, 2012;Zhou et al, 2008b). Table 5 shows a classification of some of most common spatial issues covered by research papers, as well as methods used to answer them.…”
Section: Applied Methods In Data Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spatially correlated heterogeneity accounts for any unmeasured risk to caries progression that is common for adjacent/proximal tooth surfaces [25]. We now define the neighborhood in our spatial setup.…”
Section: Statistical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, the total random variation could also be decomposed into both spatially correlated as well as uncorrelated heterogeneities, often referred to as the ‘convolution prior’45, i.e. μ i ( s ) = F ( β 0 + X 1 is T β + U 1 ( s ) + E i ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%