阅读说明
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
分类依据与纠错
分类依据题名和摘要中的方法词与领域语境,不使用期刊名称猜测研究方向。
正在核对关联版本…
代码、数据与补充材料
正在核对对应版本的资源…
关注这篇论文的作者
原文摘要
Summary When measurement error is present in covariates, it is well known that naïvely fitting a generalized linear model results in inconsistent inferences. Several methods have been proposed to adjust for measurement error without making undue distributional assumptions about the unobserved true covariates. Stefanski and Carroll focused on an unbiased estimating function rather than a likelihood approach. Their estimating function, known as the conditional score, exists for logistic regression models but has two problems: a poorly behaved Wald test and multiple solutions. They suggested a heuristic procedure to identify the best solution that works well in practice but has little theoretical support compared with maximum likelihood estimation. To help to resolve these problems, we propose a conditional quasi-likelihood to accompany the conditional score that provides an alternative to Wald's test and successfully identifies the consistent solution in large samples.