[R] confint function in MASS package for logistic regression analysis
Marc Schwartz
marc_schwartz at me.com
Wed Jan 18 18:55:01 CET 2012
On Jan 18, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Jerome Myers wrote:
> I have the following binary data set:
> Sex
> Response 0 1
> 0 159 162
> 1 4 37
> My commands
> library(MASS)
> sib.glm=glm(sib~sex,family=binomial,data=sib.data)
> summary(sib.glm)
> The coefficients in the output are
> Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
> (Intercept) -3.6826 0.5062 -7.274 3.48e-13 ***
> sex 2.2059 0.5380 4.100 4.13e-05 ***
> I have calculated the .95 confidencce interval for sex two ways:
> (1) confint(sib.glm) The result is
> 2.5 % 97.5 %
> (Intercept) -4.861153 -2.823206
> sex 1.263976 3.428764
>
> Using the usual confidence interval formula,
> (2) 2.2059 +/- 1.96*.538 = 1.15142. 3.26038
> The results from (2) are identical to those from SPSS but do not agree
> with those from the confint function.
>
> I have reviewed the MASS pdf file and, seeing no solution there,
> have tried to get the Venables & Ripley book from the local college
> libraries but the only copies are out on loan. I suspect there is a
> simple explanation of the discrepancy, perhaps a modification to account
> for pre-asymptotic distribution. Or perhaps I misunderstand the
> application of the confint fuuction in the MASS package. If someone
> knows the explanation, I'd appreciate it.
The confint.glm() function in V&R's MASS package provides "profile likelihood" confidence intervals for better coverage, as compared to the formula you have in (2), which presumes a normally distributed parameter estimate (eg. Wald type CI's).
If SPSS is using (2) for logistic regression by default, I would have to question why, but not being a user, would also have to think that they offer alternative methods.
Do a Google search for "profile likelihood confidence interval" which will lead you to a number of suitable references on theory.
HTH,
Marc Schwartz
More information about the R-help
mailing list