The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Original Stepwise Multilevel Logistic Regression Analysis of Discriminatory Accuracy: The Case of Neighbourhoods and Health
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Many multilevel logistic regression analyses of "neighbourhood and health" focus on interpreting measures of associations (e.g., odds ratio, OR). In contrast, multilevel analysis of variance is rarely considered. We propose an original stepwise analytical approach that distinguishes between "specific" (measures of association) and "general" (measures of variance) contextual effects. Performing two empirical examples we illustrate the methodology, interpret the results and discuss the implications of this kind of analysis in public health. METHODS: We analyse 43,291 individuals residing in 218 neighbourhoods in the city of Malmö, Sweden in 2006. We study two individual outcomes (psychotropic drug use and choice of private vs. public general practitioner, GP) for which the relative importance of neighbourhood as a source of individual variation differs substantially. In Step 1 of the analysis, we evaluate the OR and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve for individual-level covariates (i.e., age, sex and individual low income). In Step 2, we assess general contextual effects using the AUC. Finally, in Step 3 the OR for a specific neighbourhood characteristic (i.e., neighbourhood income) is interpreted jointly with the proportional change in variance (i.e., PCV) and the proportion of ORs in the opposite direction (POOR) statistics. RESULTS: For both outcomes, information on individual characteristics (Step 1) provide a low discriminatory accuracy (AUC = 0.616 for psychotropic drugs; = 0.600 for choosing a private GP). Accounting for neighbourhood of residence (Step 2) only improved the AUC for choosing a private GP (+0.295 units). High neighbourhood income (Step 3) was strongly associated to choosing a private GP (OR = 3.50) but the PCV was only 11% and the POOR 33%. CONCLUSION: Applying an innovative stepwise multilevel analysis, we observed that, in Malmö, the neighbourhood context per se had a negligible influence on individual use of psychotropic drugs, but appears to strongly condition individual choice of a private GP. However, the latter was only modestly explained by the socioeconomic circumstances of the neighbourhoods. Our analyses are based on real data and provide useful information for understanding neighbourhood level influences in general and on individual use of psychotropic drugs and choice of GP in particular. However, our primary aim is to illustrate how to perform and interpret a multilevel analysis of individual heterogeneity in social epidemiology and public health. Our study shows that neighbourhood "effects" are not properly quantified by reporting differences between neighbourhood averages but rather by measuring the share of the individual heterogeneity that exists at the neighbourhood level.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sick individuals and sick populations
Rose, G. (2001) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/30.3.427 · Cited by 3,736
Sick individuals and sick populations
ROSE, G. (1985) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/14.1.32 · Cited by 2,701
Recommendations for presenting analyses of effect modification and interaction
Knol, M. J., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2012) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyr218 · Cited by 1,494
Partitioning Variation in Multilevel Models
Goldstein, H., Browne, W., & Rasbash, J. (2002) · Understanding Statistics · doi:10.1207/s15328031us0104_02 · Cited by 874
Interpreting Incremental Value of Markers Added to Risk Prediction Models
Pencina, M. J., D'Agostino, R. B., Pencina, K. M., Janssens, A. C. J. W., & Greenland, P. (2012) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kws207 · Cited by 506
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2004) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2003.08.006 · Cited by 399
Pepe, M. S., Fan, J., Feng, Z., Gerds, T., & Hilden, J. (2015) · Statistics in Biosciences · doi:10.1007/s12561-014-9118-0 · Cited by 191
Cited by
Intermediate and advanced topics in multilevel logistic regression analysis
Austin, P. C., & Merlo, J. (2017) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.7336 · Cited by 649
Self-citationPhiri, M., Musonda, E., Shasha, L., Kanyamuna, V., & Lemba, M. (2023) · BMC Women's Health · doi:10.1186/s12905-023-02168-8 · Cited by 28
“Aikake Information Criteria (AIC) were used to compare models and measure goodness of fit [40, 47].”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Merlo, J., Wagner, P., Ghith, N., & Leckie, G.
- Venue
- PLOS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2016-04-27
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e0153778
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2345093711
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 19.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Original Stepwise Multilevel Logistic Regression Analysis of Discriminatory Accuracy: The Case of Neighbourhoods and Health. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0153778
- The paper
- Merlo, J., Wagner, P., Ghith, N., & Leckie, G. (2016). An Original Stepwise Multilevel Logistic Regression Analysis of Discriminatory Accuracy: The Case of Neighbourhoods and Health. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153778
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.