Failure time studies with intermittent observation and losses to follow-up

In health research interest often lies in modeling a failure time process but in many cohort studies failure status is only determined at scheduled assessment times. While the assessment times may be fixed upon study entry, individuals may become lost to follow-up and miss visits subsequent to the time of loss to follow-up. We consider a three-state model to characterize a joint failure and loss to follow-up process, and use it to investigate the impact of dependent loss to follow-up on standard parametric, nonparametric, and semiparametric analysis. The effect of dependent loss to follow-up is mitigated by fitting the joint model. The performance of standard methods is studied using the asymptotic theory of misspecified models, and the finite sample performance is examined for the standard and joint analyses through simulation studies. An application to data from a youth smoking prevention study is presented for illustration.     

A semiparametric nonlinear mixed model approach to phase I profile monitoring

When process data follow a particular curve in quality control, profile monitoring is suitable and appropriate for assessing process stability. Previous research in profile monitoring focusing on nonlinear parametric (P) modeling, involving both fixed and random-effects, was made under the assumption of an accurate nonlinear model specification. Lately, nonparametric (NP) methods have been used in the profile monitoring context in the absence of an obvious linear P model. This study introduces a novel technique in profile monitoring for any nonlinear and auto-correlated data. Referred to as the nonlinear mixed robust profile monitoring (NMRPM) method, it proposes a semiparametric (SP) approach that combines nonlinear P and NP profile fits for scenarios in which a nonlinear P model is adequate over part of the data but inadequate of the rest. These three methods (P, NP, and NMRPM) account for the auto-correlation within profiles and treats the collection of profiles as a random sample with a common population. During Phase I analysis, a version of Hotelling’s T² statistic is proposed for each approach to identify abnormal profiles based on the estimated random effects and obtain the corresponding control limits. The performance of the NMRPM method is then evaluated using a real data set. Results reveal that the NMRPM method is robust to model misspecification and performs adequately against a correctly specified nonlinear P model. Control charts with the NMRPM method have excellent capability of detecting changes in Phase I data with control limits that are easily computable.     

Robust Mean Estimation Under a Possibly Incorrect Log-Normality Assumption

Nonparametric and parametric estimators are combined to minimize the mean squared error among their linear combinations. The combined estimator is consistent and for large sample sizes has a smaller mean squared error than the nonparametric estimator when the parametric assumption is violated. If the parametric assumption holds, the combined estimator has a smaller MSE than the parametric estimator. Our simulation examples focus on mean estimation when data may follow a lognormal distribution, or can be a mixture with an exponential or a uniform distribution. Motivating examples illustrate possible application areas.     

A Realized Stochastic Volatility Model With Box–Cox Transformation

This article presents a new class of realized stochastic volatility model based on realized volatilities and returns jointly. We generalize the traditionally used logarithm transformation of realized volatility to the Box–Cox transformation, a more flexible parametric family of transformations. A two-step maximum likelihood estimation procedure is introduced to estimate this model on the basis of Koopman and Scharth (2013 Koopman, S.J., Scharth, M. (2013), The Analysis of Stochastic Volatility in the Presence of Daily Realised Measures, Journal of Financial Econometrics, 11, 76–115.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Simulation results show that the two-step estimator performs well, and the misspecified log transformation may lead to inaccurate parameter estimation and certain excessive skewness and kurtosis. Finally, an empirical investigation on realized volatility measures and daily returns is carried out for several stock indices.     

Focused Information Criteria,Model Selection,and Model Averaging in a Tobit Model With a Nonzero Threshold

Claeskens and Hjort (2003 Claeskens, G. and Hjort, N. L. 2003. “The Focused Information Criterion”. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 98: 900–945. (with discussion)[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) have developed a focused information criterion (FIC) for model selection that selects different models based on different focused functions with those functions tailored to the parameters singled out for interest. Hjort and Claeskens (2003 Hjort, N. L. and Claeskens, G. 2003. “Frequentist Model Average Estimators”. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 98: 879–899. (with discussion)[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) also have presented model averaging as an alternative to model selection, and suggested a local misspecification framework for studying the limiting distributions and asymptotic risk properties of post-model selection and model average estimators in parametric models. Despite the burgeoning literature on Tobit models, little work has been done on model selection explicitly in the Tobit context. In this article we propose FICs for variable selection allowing for such measures as mean absolute deviation, mean squared error, and expected expected linear exponential errors in a type I Tobit model with an unknown threshold. We also develop a model average Tobit estimator using values of a smoothed version of the FIC as weights. We study the finite-sample performance of model selection and model average estimators resulting from various FICs via a Monte Carlo experiment, and demonstrate the possibility of using a model screening procedure before combining the models. Finally, we present an example from a well-known study on married women's working hours to illustrate the estimation methods discussed. This article has supplementary material online.     

A universal robust method for analysing bivariate continuous and proportion data

Traditionally, analysis of Hydrology employs only one hydrological variable. Recently, Nadarajah [A bivariate distribution with gamma and beta marginals with application to drought data. J Appl Stat. 2009;36:277–301] proposed a bivariate model with gamma and beta as marginal distributions to analyse the drought duration and the proportion of drought events. However, the validity of this method hinges on fulfilment of stringent assumptions. We propose a robust likelihood approach which can be used to make inference for general bivariate continuous and proportion data. Unlike the gamma–beta (GB) model which is sensitive to model misspecification, the new method provides legitimate inference without knowing the true underlying distribution of the bivariate data. Simulations and the analysis of the drought data from the State of Nebraska, USA, are provided to make contrasts between this robust approach and the GB model.     

Robust inference for Birnbaum–Saunders regressions

We propose a robust likelihood approach for the Birnbaum–Saunders regression model under model misspecification, which provides full likelihood inferences about regression parameters without knowing the true random mechanisms underlying the data. Monte Carlo simulation experiments and analysis of real data sets are carried out to illustrate the efficacy of the proposed robust methodology.     

A Consistent Variance Estimator for 2SLS When Instruments Identify Different LATEs

Under treatment effect heterogeneity, an instrument identifies the instrument-specific local average treatment effect (LATE). With multiple instruments, two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimand is a weighted average of different LATEs. What is often overlooked in the literature is that the postulated moment condition evaluated at the 2SLS estimand does not hold unless those LATEs are the same. If so, the conventional heteroscedasticity-robust variance estimator would be inconsistent, and 2SLS standard errors based on such estimators would be incorrect. I derive the correct asymptotic distribution, and propose a consistent asymptotic variance estimator by using the result of Hall and Inoue (2003 Hall, A.R., and Inoue, A. (2003), “The Large Sample Behaviour of the Generalized Method of Moments Estimator in Misspecified Models,” Journal of Econometrics, 114, 361–394.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], Journal of Econometrics) on misspecified moment condition models. This can be used to correctly calculate the standard errors regardless of whether there is more than one LATE or not.