TABLE 1.
(A) Error Type | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Method | Neither | PE only | ME only | PE and ME |
LRF | 0.012 (0.024), 2822.0 | 0.070 (0.115), 2697.6 | −0.071 (−), 2762.4b | Not identifiable |
LRA | n/aa | 0.071 (0.115), 2697.5 | −0.088 (−), 2762.4b | Not identifiable |
DFA | 0.016 (0.025), 2277.6 | 0.090 (0.114), 2153.0 | ∞ (−), 2217.7c | Not identifiable |
(B) Error Type | ||||
Neither | PE only | ME only | PE and ME | |
LRF | n/ad | n/ad | 0.026 (0.049), 2353.8 | 0.046 (0.082), 2340.8 |
LRA | n/ad | n/ad | 0.026 (0.049), 2353.8 | 0.046 (0.082), 2340.8 |
DFA | n/ad | n/ad | 0.030 (0.051), 1809.5 | 0.050 (0.081), 1796.5 |
There is no integral to approximate because assuming neither error type means MCP-1 is precisely measured.
Estimate of residual error variance in MCP-1 given covariates model hit lower bound of 0.001. Standard error omitted because variance-covariance matrix not positive definite.
Estimate of residual error variance in discriminant function model hit lower bound of 0.001, causing “blow-up” in log-OR estimate.
Cannot fit with replicates because no ME would imply that two distinct values are both the true MCP-1.
DFA, discriminant function approach; LRA, logistic regression with approximate maximum likelihood; LRF, logistic regression with full maximum likelihood; MCP-1, monocyte chemotactic protein-1; ME, measurement error; OR, odds ratio; PE, processing error.