RE: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output

From: Mats Karlsson Date: August 15, 2007 technical Source: mail-archive.com
Dear Nitin, If I interpret your first question narrowly, we did a study that at least partly addressed this (Wahlby U, Bouw MR, Jonsson EN, Karlsson MO. Assessment of type I error rates for the statistical sub-model in NONMEM. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2002;29(3):251-69.) The conclusion was that there seems to be some basis for using the OFV in likelihood ratio tests for looking at aspects of the variability models. However, such tests are sensitive to aspects like method used, shape of the distribution, etc. The final paragraph was: "In conclusion, the LR test is not reliable for the statistical sub-model if the FO method is used. For the FOCE INTER method, the LR test is appropriate when the underlying assumptions of normality of residuals hold true and data per individual are not too sparse. Deviations from normality, which can be diagnosed from the modeling output, may cause estimated type I error rates that deviate markedly from the expected. The type I error rates for inclusion of variance and covariance parameters are the most affected by deviations from normality, while those for covariates on variance parameters are more robust." Best regards, Mats Mats Karlsson, PhD Professor of Pharmacometrics Div. of Pharmacokinetics and Drug Therapy Dept. of Pharmaceutical Biosciences Faculty of Pharmacy Uppsala University Box 591 SE-751 24 Uppsala Sweden phone +46 18 471 4105 fax +46 18 471 4003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____
Quoted reply history
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nitin Mehrotra Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 18:19 To: [email protected] Subject: [NMusers] Model Comparison and Viewing of Output Dear NMusers, I had a couple of questions for the group members: 1. Model Comparison: Everything else remaining the same in a model, should a drop in the objective function on addition of an eta, sigma or a covariance term reflect an improvement in a model. Or comparing AICs, considering eta's and sigma's as additional parameters a correct approach. I understand that these decisions are rather based on multiple criterias like goodness of fit plots, biological sense, physiological plausibility of the parameter estimates etc. But specifically would like to know whether comparing objective function among these models a logical approach? 2. Viewing Output via $TABLE option: When we do simulation using NONMEM,the output file contains both the dosing and observation records. Is there a way in NONMEM to specify a priori in the control stream, such that only observation records could be obtained in the simulation output file? Thanks and Regards Nitin Mehrotra Nitin Mehrotra, Ph.D Post Doctoral Research Fellow 874 Union Avenue, Suite4.5p/5p Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences University of Tennessee Health Science Center Memphis, TN, USA-38163 901-448-3385 (Lab) [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____ Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48517/*http:/surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_pan el_invite.asp?a=7 our Network Research Panel today!
Aug 14, 2007 Nitin Mehrotra Model Comparison and Viewing of Output
Aug 14, 2007 Mark Sale RE: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output
Aug 15, 2007 Mats Karlsson RE: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output
Aug 15, 2007 Nitin Mehrotra Re: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output
Aug 15, 2007 Nick Holford Re: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output
Aug 16, 2007 Nitin Mehrotra Re: Model Comparison and Viewing of Output