[R-sig-ME] lmer: LRT and mcmcpvalue for fixed effects
Julie Marsh
marshj02 at student.uwa.edu.au
Tue Jul 15 07:43:38 CEST 2008
Dear lmer expeRts,
I wondered if anybody could help me reconcile these two test results ?
I have been fitting models of the form:
BASIC MODEL
fl.basic <- lmer(y.fl~(I(TIME-200) + I((TIME-200)^2))*SEX + V65_A +
(I(TIME-200)|STUDYNO ),
data=fl.data[!is.na(fl.data$TIME),], method="ML",
na.action=na.omit,
control=list(maxIter=1000, niterEM=0, gradient=FALSE,
msVerbose = 1))
BASIC MODEL PLUS BASIC GENETIC EFFECT
fl.gen1 <- lmer(y.fl ~(I(TIME-200) + I((TIME-200)^2))*SEX + SNP_dom + V65_A +
(I(TIME-200)|STUDYNO),
data=fl.data[!is.na(fl.data$TIME),], method="ML",
na.action=na.omit,
control=list(maxIter=2000, niterEM=0, gradient=FALSE,
msVerbose = 1))
I have compared the models using both (1) LRT
anova(fl.gen1, fl.basic)
0.5*(1-pchisq(2*(logLik(fl.gen1)-logLik(fl.basic)),0)) +
0.5*(1-pchisq(2*(logLik(fl.gen1)-logLik(fl.basic)),1))
OUTPUT (1)
Models:
fl.basic: y.fl ~ (I(TIME - 200) + I((TIME - 200)^2)) * SEX + V65_A + (I(TIME -
200) | STUDYNO)
fl.gen : y.fl ~ (I(TIME - 200) + I((TIME - 200)^2)) * SEX + SNP_dom +
fl.gen : V65_A + (I(TIME - 200) | STUDYNO)
Df AIC BIC logLik Chisq Chi Df Pr(>Chisq)
fl.basic 10 4335.4 4396.1 -2157.7
fl.gen1 11 4291.4 4358.2 -2134.7 45.929 1 1.226e-11 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 *** 0.001 ** 0.01 * 0.05 . 0.1 1
> 0.5*(1-pchisq(2*(logLik(fl.gen1)-logLik(fl.basic)),0)) +
> 0.5*(1-pchisq(2*(logLik(fl.gen1)-logLik(fl.basic)),1))
[1] 6.131984e-12
attr(,"nobs")
[1] 3189
and (2) using Prof Bates' wonderful mcmcpvalue function
mcmc = mcmcsamp(fl.gen1, n = 100000)
mcmcpvalue(as.matrix(mcmc[ ,5]))
OUTPUT (2): main effect SNP_dom: p=0.0263
Given that I am using 2 different tests for two different hypotheses I
still would have expected these p-values to be more similar. I am so
sorry that I can't post the data and the lmer output but I am bound by
confidentiality. <big sigh> I understand completely if it is not
possible to provide any help given this lack of further information.
I have eagerly read and re-read the rwiki help page .........
http://wiki.r-project.org/rwiki/doku.php?id=guides:lmer-tests
....... but still am unable to explain why the results should be so
different. Much as I would love to argue against the reliance on
p-values I'm afraid I am a resigned pragmatist when it comes to trying
to get anything published. <sorry!> Needless to say I will swamp the
article with far more informative plots and CI's.
Any help would be very much appreciated.
kindest regards, julie marsh.
More information about the R-sig-mixed-models
mailing list