跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
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

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦复杂调查中的潜类别估计,未明确离散选择机制或因果识别。

反馈分类问题

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
C Mitchell Dayton
Barry I Graubard

复杂抽样调查数据的潜类别分析

研究问题
如何利用重复的膳食回忆记录区分经常与不经常食用蔬菜的人群,并在估计通常摄入情况时纳入复杂抽样设计的影响?
方法与思路
作者将抽样权重引入潜类别估计算法,采用 jackknife 标准误处理复杂设计,并以调查数据和模拟评估估计及区间覆盖。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称忽略权重会使参数估计产生偏差,jackknife 方差略保守但覆盖表现满意,而调查总体设计效应不适合直接用于潜类别方差。
阅读关注点
应核对类别定义、重复记录的模型假设、权重进入算法的方式及 jackknife 设计,并比较加权结果与模拟覆盖的适用范围。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;潜类别假设及模拟细节未说明,膳食分类结果也不能解释为蔬菜摄入的因果效应。

原文摘要

High fruit and vegetable intake is associated with decreased cancer risk. However, dietary recall data from national surveys suggest that, on any given day, intake falls below the recommended minima of three daily servings of vegetables and two daily servings of fruit. There is no single widely accepted measure of “usual” intake. One approach is to regard the distribution of intake as a mixture of “regular” (relatively frequent) and “nonregular” (relatively infrequent) consumers, using an indicator of whether an individual consumed the food of interest on the recall day. We use a new approach to summarizing dietary data, latent class analysis (LCA), to estimate “usual” intake of vegetables. The data consist of four 24-hour dietary recalls from the 1985 Continuing Survey of Intakes by Individuals collected from 1,028 women. Traditional LCA based on simple random sampling was extended to complex survey data by introducing sample weights into the latent class estimation algorithm and by accounting for the complex sample design through the use of jackknife standard errors. A two-class model showed that 18%% do not regularly consume vegetables, compared to an unweighted estimate of 33%%. Simulations showed that ignoring sample weights resulted in biased parameter estimates and that jackknife variances were slightly conservative but provided satisfactory confidence interval coverage. Using a survey-wide estimate of the design effect for variance estimation is not accurate for LCA. The methods proposed in this article are readily implemented for the analysis of complex sample survey data.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文