Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "trtdrug".
Did you mean:
trtdrugd
2004 Jan 30
0
GLMM (lme4) vs. glmmPQL output (summary with lme4 revised)
...ght: the base example glmmPQL is from MASS,
http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/pub/MASS4/
#Package: lme4
#Version: 0.4-7
#Date: 2004/01/26 !!!!!! Revised
--- GLMM/lme4/Pinheiro/Bates
Estimate Std. Error DF z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) 3.41202 0.65874 169 5.1796 2.223e-07
trtdrug -1.24736 0.81824 47 -1.5244 0.1273995
trtdrug+ -0.75433 0.81993 47 -0.9200 0.3575758
I(week > 2)TRUE -1.60726 0.45525 169 -3.5305 0.0004148
--- glmmPQL/MASS/Venables&Ripley
Value Std.Error DF t-value p-value
(Intercept) 3.41 0.519 169...
2005 Jun 16
1
identical results with PQL and Laplace options in lmer function (package lme4)
...Groups Name Variance Std.Dev.
ID (Intercept) 3.2721 1.8089
# of obs: 220, groups: ID, 50
Estimated scale (compare to 1) 0.7800484
Fixed effects:
Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) 3.41227 0.65884 5.1792 2.228e-07 ***
trtdrug -1.24743 0.81841 -1.5242 0.1274555
trtdrug+ -0.75440 0.82009 -0.9199 0.3576229
week21 -1.60737 0.45527 -3.5306 0.0004146 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
> model.Laplace
Generalized linea...
2008 Dec 06
1
Questions on the results from glmmPQL(MASS)
...(Intercept) Residual
StdDev: 1.410637 0.7800511
Variance function:
Structure: fixed weights
Formula: ~invwt
Fixed effects: y ~ trt + I(week > 2)
Value Std.Error DF t-value
p-value
(Intercept) 3.412014 0.5185033 169 6.580506 0.0000
trtdrug -1.247355 0.6440635 47 -1.936696 0.0588
trtdrug+ -0.754327 0.6453978 47 -1.168779 0.2484
I(week > 2)TRUE -1.607257 0.3583379 169 -4.485311 0.0000
Correlation:
(Intr) trtdrg trtdr+
trtdrug -0.598
trtdrug+ -0.571 0.460...
2003 Jun 17
1
probability values ?
Hello
I try to find probability values of some predictor combinations using
logistic reg. in response level.
Firstly I found coefficients by glm function.
Then I followed two ways to get probability values:
1- probility <- exp(X0+bX1+cX2+...)/((1+exp(X0+bX1+cX2+...))
2- probility <- predict(glm.obj,type="resp")
Should have these two given same result ?
if so, I did not have. Why
2006 Feb 07
1
post-hoc comparisons following glmm
Dear R community,
I performed a generalized linear mixed model using glmmPQL (MASS
library) to analyse my data i.e : y is the response with a poisson
distribution, t and Trait are the independent variables which are
continuous and categorical (3 categories C, M and F) respectively, ind
is the random variable.
mydata<-glmmPQL(y~t+Trait,random=~1|ind,family=poisson,data=tab)
Do you think it