IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/biomet/v97y2010i4p990-996.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the equivalence of prospective and retrospective likelihood methods in case-control studies

Author

Listed:
  • Ana-Maria Staicu

Abstract

We present new approaches to analyzing case-control studies using prospective likelihood methods. In the classical framework, we extend the equality of the profile likelihoods to the Barndorff-Nielsen modified profile likelihoods for prospective and retrospective models. This enables simple and accurate approximate conditional inference for stratified case-control studies of moderate stratum size. In the Bayesian framework, we provide sufficient conditions on priors for the prospective model parameters to yield a prospective marginal posterior density equal to its retrospective counterpart. Our results extend the prospective-retrospective equivalence in the Bayesian paradigm with a more general class of priors than has previously been investigated. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana-Maria Staicu, 2010. "On the equivalence of prospective and retrospective likelihood methods in case-control studies," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 97(4), pages 990-996.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:97:y:2010:i:4:p:990-996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/biomet/asq054
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shi Li & Bhramar Mukherjee & Stuart Batterman & Malay Ghosh, 2013. "Bayesian Analysis of Time-Series Data under Case-Crossover Designs: Posterior Equivalence and Inference," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 925-936, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:97:y:2010:i:4:p:990-996. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/biomet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.