Below you can find information for our next event next Wednesday (2nd of May). Links for registration for this event (and for the following event at the end of May) can be found on our website.
Speakers: Emily Granger (University of Manchester) and Kathryn Leeming (University of Bristol)
Time: 14:00-15:00 followed by drinks and nibbles.
Place: Room 116, new Mathematics & Statistics Building (which looks like this), University of Glasgow, University Place, Glasgow G12 8SQ (C3 on campus map).
Summary: 1st talk (30 mins) Propensity score diagnostics: the challenges we face when providing evidence that a propensity based estimate is unbiased
Observational data are useful for studying comparative effectiveness or safety of medical treatments; however they are prone to bias due to confounders. Confounding bias arises when covariates which predict the outcome of interest have different distributions across treatment groups. Propensity scores (defined as the patient’s probability of receiving treatment conditional on their baseline characteristics) are becoming an increasingly popular method used to account for confounders. Conditioning on the propensity score balances the distribution of covariates across treatment groups and hence eliminates confounding bias. However, there is some debate as to whether propensity scores are reliable. One concern is that an inadequately estimated propensity score may not effectively balance covariate distributions, which could lead to biased results. There are a variety of balance diagnostics being used to assess the adequacy of propensity scores, but no consensus on the best method and the implementation in the applied medical literature is far from optimal. During this talk I will discuss reasons why some of the commonly applied balance diagnostics are not appropriate and highlight conflictions in the literature which could mislead applied researchers using propensity scores. Additionally, I will present a simulation study designed to compare diagnostics in terms of their ability to identify different types of propensity score misspecification. Results indicate that commonly used diagnostics such as standardised differences can be unreliable. Finally, I will discuss plans regarding development of new propensity score diagnostics.
Summary: 2nd talk (30 mins) Network Time Series
A network time series is formed of data collected over time at nodes of a graph, or network. These networks arise in a wide range of settings, such as environmental, financial, and medical.In this talk, analysis of a disease incidence data set is presented using the Network Autoregressive (NAR) framework. As an extension to the univariate autoregressive time series model, NAR allows for dependence on neighbouring nodes according the underlying network structure.The network associated with the time series could be un-weighted and un-directed, or have more complex features such as edge weights and directions, or even be time-varying. We demonstrate a method to recover an un-weighted graph from a multivariate time series using the NAR model. Advantages of using network-based methods for such data will be discussed, and performance compared to methods which do not use network structure.
Registration: Please register for general admission to attend using the button below (or the previous link) or register to take part in the livestreamed event
Full details and registration link below and at our website:
https://sites.google.com/site/rssglasgow/events
Best wishes,
RSS Glasgow Local Group committee
[log in to unmask]
You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
SIGNOFF allstat
to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
|