Comparing Penalized Splines and Fractional Polynomials for Flexible Modelling of the Effects of Continuous Predictor Variables
P(enalized)-splines and fractional polynomials (FPs) have emerged as powerful smoothing techniques with increasing popularity in several fields of applied research. Both approaches provide considerable flexibility, but only limited comparative evaluations of the performance and properties of the two methods have been conducted to date. We thus performed extensive simulations to compare FPs of degree 2 (FP2) and degree 4 (FP4) and P-splines that used generalized cross validation (GCV) and restricted maximum likelihood (REML) for smoothing parameter selection. We evaluated the ability of P-splines and FPs to recover the ?true? functional form of the association between continuous, binary and survival outcomes and exposure for linear, quadratic and more complex, non-linear functions, using different sample sizes and signal to noise ratios. We found that for more curved functions FP2, the current default implementation in standard software, showed considerably bias and consistently higher mean squared error (MSE) compared to spline-based estimators (REML, GCV) and FP4, that performed equally well in most simulation settings. FPs however, are prone to artefacts due to the specific choice of the origin, while P-splines based on GCV reveal sometimes wiggly estimates in particular for small sample sizes. Finally,we highlight the specific features of the approaches in a real dataset.
|Date of creation:||May 2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Universitätsstraße 15, A - 6020 Innsbruck|
Web page: http://www.uibk.ac.at/fakultaeten/volkswirtschaft_und_statistik/index.html.en
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inn:wpaper:2010-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Janette Walde)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.