Bivariate correlation coefficients in family‐type clustered studies
Open accessAbstract
We propose a unified approach based on a bivariate linear mixed effects model to estimate three types of bivariate correlation coefficients (BCCs), as well as the associated variances between two quantitative variables in cross‐sectional data from a family‐type clustered design. These BCCs are defined at different levels of experimental units including clusters (e.g., families) and subjects within clusters and assess different aspects on the relationships between two variables. We study likelihood‐based inferences for these BCCs, and provide easy implementation using standard software SAS. Unlike several existing BCC estimators in the literature on clustered data, our approach can seamlessly handle two major analytic challenges arising from a family‐type clustered design: (1) many families may consist of only one single subject; (2) one of the paired measurements may be missing for some subjects. Hence, our approach maximizes the use of data from all subjects (even those missing one of the two variables to be correlated) from all families, regardless of family size. We also conduct extensive simulations to show that our estimators are superior to existing estimators in handling missing data or/and imbalanced family sizes and the proposed Wald test maintains good size and power for hypothesis testing. Finally, we analyze a real‐world Alzheimer's disease dataset from a family clustered study to investigate the BCCs across different modalities of disease markers including cognitive tests, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and neuroimaging biomarkers.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A multivariate LME approach can control for EYO and for within-family correlation.
“Compared with the simple correlation estimation method (Pearson or Spearman correlation), the multivariate LME model can adjust for covariates such as EYO, as well as accounting for the correlation within the family cluster63,64.”
From A soluble phosphorylated tau signature links tau, amyloid and the evolution of stages of dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease (2020) · cites this paper as [63]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 14
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Gao F Thompson P Xiong C Miller JP Analyzing multivariate longitudinal data using SAS® Proceedings of the Thirty-first Annual SAS Users Group International Conference 2006 187 131
- Hamlett A Ryan L Wolfinger R On the use of PROC MIXED to estimate correlation in the presence of repeated measures SAS Users Group International, Proceedings of the Statistics and Data Analysis Section Paper 2004 198 1 7
- Authors
- Luo, J., D'Angelo, G., Gao, F., Ding, J., & Xiong, C.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- Division of Biostatistics Washington University School of Medicine 660 S. Euclid Avenue, Box 8067 St. Louis MO 63110 USA
- Corresponding author
- Luo, Jingqin
- Venue
- Biometrical Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-09-11
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1084-1109
- ISSN
- 0323-3847 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-4036
- PMC
- PMC4741284
- OpenAlex
- W2129337268
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 1.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Biometrical Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute on Aging (R01AG029672, R01AG034119, P50AG005681, P01AG003991, U01AG032438, P01AG026276)
- National Cancer Institute (U10CA180860, P30CA091842)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Spatial and Panel Data Analysis
- Keywords
- missing data, likelihood-based inference, Wald test, Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, neuroimaging biomarkers, cognitive tests
- MeSH terms
- Alzheimer Disease, Biometry, Female, Humans, Male, Pedigree, Models, Statistical, Biomarkers, Multivariate Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review