An example of multilevel modelling using gllamm: a cluster intervention trial - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 23
About This Presentation
Title:

An example of multilevel modelling using gllamm: a cluster intervention trial

Description:

Data a cluster intervention trial in Ethiopia. Using gllamm to model the data ... presence of animals & animal faeces. presence of human faeces and household waste ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:404
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 24
Provided by: itd690
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: An example of multilevel modelling using gllamm: a cluster intervention trial


1
An example of multi-level modelling using gllamm
a cluster intervention trial
  • Tansy Edwards
  • TEG, IDEU

2
Contents
  • Introduction to gllamm
  • Data a cluster intervention trial in Ethiopia
  • Using gllamm to model the data
  • Possible future analysis applying causal
    modelling techniques
  • Intend to keep theory to a bare minimum in order
    to demonstrate use of gllamm
  • Please share gllamm experiences at the end

3
What is gllamm?
  • User-written program for Stata
  • Generalized linear, latent and mixed models
  • Generalized Linear Mixed Models
  • Factor Models
  • Item Response Models
  • Structural Equation Models
  • Latent Class Models
  • Multilevel Regression Models
  • Installation instructions at www.gllamm.org
  • Manual other useful references also available
    from this site

4
Example Modelling data from a cluster
intervention trialImpact of health education on
prevalence of active trachoma in rural Ethiopia
Collaborators J Todd (LSHTM) P Cumberland
(ICH)
5
Study Design
  • Health education intervention
  • made up of several components
  • components combined to give staggered levels of
    intervention
  • Education at village level
  • Main outcome
  • Binary signs of active trachoma in children aged
    3 9

6
Intervention structure allocation
  • Components
  • Radio broadcasts (received by all)
  • NGO activities
  • Video Broadcasts
  • Control arm (10 communities)
  • Standard arm (20 communities)
  • NGO activities
  • Enhanced arm (10 communities)
  • NGO activities video showings

7
Study Area Participants
  • 2 large areas identified with
  • high prevalence of active trachoma
  • NGOs actively working in eye health
  • 40 rural villages
  • households randomly selected
  • all children aged 3 to 9 in HHs eligible

8
Data Structure
Village (3)
Household (2)
Child (1)
9
Data (1)
  • Village Level
  • intervention arm
  • Household Level
  • presence of animals animal faeces
  • presence of human faeces and household waste
  • presence of flies
  • access to water (within 15 min walk)
  • personal hygiene of children
  • knowledge of trachoma transmission prevention

10
Data (2)
  • Child Level
  • signs of active trachoma (outcome)
  • signs of trachomatous scarring
  • age
  • flies on the eyes
  • discharge from the eyes and nose
  • Collection
  • repeated cross-sectional surveys
  • baseline (2002)
  • follow up (2003)

11
Baseline data by intervention group
Methods included face-washing, domestic
environmental hygiene, eliminating flies, not
sharing towels
12
Multilevel modelling
  • random effects modelling, mixed models
  • hierarchical data, repeated measures data
  • STATA software xt commands
  • Multilevel and Longitudinal Modelling using
    Stata.
  • Rabe-Hesketh, S. and Skrondal, A. (2005). Stata
    Press.
  • http//statcomp.ats.ucla.edu/mlm/default.htm

13
Modelling the data (1)
  • Logistic regression with 1 covariate
  • logit(pij) a ßinterventionj
  • Random intercept model with 2 levels
  • logit(pij) (const Uj) ßinterventionj
  • Assume Uj
  • normally distributed
  • mean 0 and variance su2

14
Modelling the data (2)
  • Variance between the level 2 units su2
  • Total variance
  • sum (variances at each level)
  • The ICC at level 2
  • proportion of the total variance
  • between the level 2 units
  • su2 / total variance

15
Modelling the data with Stata (3)
  • Fitted 4 random intercept models
  • Modelling the follow-up data
  • Each included intervention group as a fixed
    effect
  • Models 1 2 have a random intercept at village
    level only (a 2-level model)
  • Model 1 fitted using xtlogit, model 2 using
    gllamm
  • Models 3 4 have random intercepts levels 2 3
  • Model 4 also adjusts for logit transformed
    baseline prevalence

16
command syntax model 3
  • gen cons1
  • eq l2_c cons
  • eq l3_c cons
  • xi gllamm tr i.grp, i(hh village) nrf(1 1)
    eqs(l2_c l3_c)
  • family(binomial) link(logit) nip(4) nolog eform
  • mat inite(b)
  • xi gllamm tr i.grp, i(hh village) nrf(1 1)
    eqs(l2_c l3_c)
  • family(binomial) link(logit) from(init) adapt
    nolog eform

17
gen cons1 eq l2_c cons eq l3_c cons xi gllamm
trachoma i.grp, i(hh village) nrf (1 1) eqs(l2_c
l3_c) family(binomial) link(logit) nolog eform
adapt number of level 1 units 2008 number of
level 2 units 974 number of level 3 units 40
log likelihood -1216.7526 ---------------------
------------------------------------------- tracho
ma exp(b) Std. Err. z Pgtz 95 Conf.
Interval ------ --------------------------------
------------------------ _Igrp_1 .8477485
.3167323 -0.44 0.658 .4076098
1.763151 _Igrp_2 .907824 .3928112 -0.22
0.823 .3887682 2.119886 -----------------------
----------------------------------------- Varianc
es and covariances of random effects -------------
----------------------------------------------
level 2 (hh) var(1) .47227179 (.18614591)
level 3 (village) var(1) .79554109
(.22071555)
18
Results
  • Level 1 variance 3.29
  • Models 3 4 took 10 mins to run

19
Random slope model
  • Random slope term for intervention group
  • logit(pij) (a Uj) (b
    Sj)interventionj
  • Investigating whether effect of the intervention
    varies within intervention arm
  • To model this
  • Specify another eq for the random slope term

20
. eq l3_s grp . xi gllamm tr i.grp, i(hh
village) nrf(1 2) eqs(l2_c l3_c l3_s) link(logit)
family(binomial) nolog eform from(init)
adapt --------------------------------------------
--------------------- tf exp(b) Std.
Err. z Pgtz 95 Conf. Interval ---------
-------------------------------------------------
------ _Igrp_1 .8588554 .2624249 -0.50
0.619 .4718825 1.56317 _Igrp_2 .9488757
.4315146 -0.12 0.908 .3891468
2.31369 ------------------------------------------
----------------------- Variances and covariances
of random effects level 2 (hh) var(1)
.47469993 (.18647758) level 3 (village)
var(1) .38048455 (.22026869) cov(2,1)
.05994385 (.16862811) cor(2,1) .21458453
var(2) .20509514 (.21710728)
21
Extensions
  • Data from a 2nd follow-up survey are available
  • Covariate Adjustment
  • Investigate baseline imbalance further
  • Adjust for baseline imbalance
  • Investigating how the intervention works
  • in terms of the F and E components of the SAFE
    strategy

22
Causal Diagram
baseline prevalence
health education
age of child
sanitation facilities access to water
face-washing
sanitation practices
wealth
baseline knowledge
trachoma
animals
flies
  • child level
  • household level
  • village level
  • unmeasured

23
  • Comments questions ???
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com