1980
DOI: 10.1080/00031305.1980.10483031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Population Marginal Means in the Linear Model: An Alternative to Least Squares Means

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
591
0
5

Year Published

1991
1991
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,206 publications
(596 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
591
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…All other independent variables were retained in the model if they were significant at or below the 10% level. Mean QoL change was estimated for each treatment group from the regression parameter estimates using the Least Squares Means (LSM) method (Searle et al, 1980). T statistics were then generated to test for differences in mean change scores between the treatment groups.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All other independent variables were retained in the model if they were significant at or below the 10% level. Mean QoL change was estimated for each treatment group from the regression parameter estimates using the Least Squares Means (LSM) method (Searle et al, 1980). T statistics were then generated to test for differences in mean change scores between the treatment groups.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Having defined appropriate partially adjusted means for each breed-management group, we can define appropriate main effect means (termed population marginal means by Searle, Speed and Milliken, 1980) for the breeds averaged over the management groups and for the management groups averaged over the breeds. The partially adjusted main effect mean for breed i is defined to be…”
Section: Partially Adjusted Main Effect Meansmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We first calculated the weighted mean slope for each physiographic area, weighting backtransformed route trends by the marginal mean count on the route (Searle et al 1980;Component 6), and a measure of the reliability of the route trend estimate, calculated as the variance of the slope divided by the mean square error for the route-specific regression (Component 7). The marginal mean is an estimate of the count that would have been recorded in the mid-year of the analysis period (i.e., 1980) by an average observer.…”
Section: Thomas and Martin Bbs Analysis Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The weightings used were the marginal mean count on the route (Searle et al 1980; Component 6), a precision estimate given by the squared deviations of the counts from the subroute mean (Component 7), and an area weighting (Component 8). We constrained the marginal mean so that it could not exceed the maximum number of birds seen on all routes, or 200, whichever was the least.…”
Section: Cws Route Regressionmentioning
confidence: 99%