A joint penalized spline smoothing model for the number of positive and negative COVID-19 tests.

One of the key tools to understand and reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is testing. The total number of tests, the number of positive tests, the number of negative tests, and the positivity rate are interconnected indicators and vary with time. To better understand the relationship between these indicators, against the background of an evolving pandemic, the association between the number of positive tests and the number of negative tests is studied using a joint modeling approach. All countries in the European Union, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Norway are included in the analysis. We propose a joint penalized spline model in which the penalized spline is reparameterized as a linear mixed model. The model allows for flexible trajectories by smoothing the country-specific deviations from the overall penalized spline and accounts for heteroscedasticity by allowing the autocorrelation parameters and residual variances to vary among countries. The association between the number of positive tests and the number of negative tests is derived from the joint distribution for the random intercepts and slopes. The correlation between the random intercepts and the correlation between the random slopes were both positive. This suggests that, when countries increase their testing capacity, both the number of positive tests and negative tests will increase. A significant correlation was found between the random intercepts, but the correlation between the random slopes was not significant due to a wide credible interval.

Reflections on the concept of optimality of single decision point treatment regimes.

In many areas, applied researchers as well as practitioners have to choose between different solutions for a problem at hand; this calls for optimal decision rules to settle the choices involved. As a key example, one may think of the search for optimal treatment regimes (OTRs) in clinical research, that specify which treatment alternative should be administered to each patient under study. Motivated by the fact that the concept of optimality of decision rules in general and treatment regimes in particular has received so far relatively little attention and discussion, we will present a number of reflections on it, starting from the basics of any optimization problem. Specifically, we will analyze the search space and the to be optimized criterion function underlying the search of single decision point OTRs, along with the many choice aspects that show up in their specification. Special attention is paid to formal characteristics and properties as well as to substantive concerns and hypotheses that may guide these choices. We illustrate with a few empirical examples taken from the literature. Finally, we discuss how the presented reflections may help sharpen statistical thinking about optimality of decision rules for treatment assignment and to facilitate the dialogue between the statistical consultant and the applied researcher in search of an OTR.

A multivariate spatio-temporal model for the incidence of imported COVID-19 cases and COVID-19 deaths in Cuba.

To monitor the COVID-19 epidemic in Cuba, data on several epidemiological indicators have been collected on a daily basis for each municipality. Studying the spatio-temporal dynamics in these indicators, and how they behave similarly, can help us better understand how COVID-19 spread across Cuba. Therefore, spatio-temporal models can be used to analyze these indicators. Univariate spatio-temporal models have been thoroughly studied, but when interest lies in studying the association between multiple outcomes, a joint model that allows for association between the spatial and temporal patterns is necessary. The purpose of our study was to develop a multivariate spatio-temporal model to study the association between the weekly number of COVID-19 deaths and the weekly number of imported COVID-19 cases in Cuba during 2021. To allow for correlation between the spatial patterns, a multivariate conditional autoregressive prior (MCAR) was used. Correlation between the temporal patterns was taken into account by using two approaches; either a multivariate random walk prior was used or a multivariate conditional autoregressive prior (MCAR) was used. All models were fitted within a Bayesian framework.

The individual-level surrogate threshold effect in a causal-inference setting with normally distributed endpoints.

In the meta-analytic surrogate evaluation framework, the trial-level coefficient of determination Rtrial2 quantifies the strength of the association between the expected causal treatment effects on the surrogate (S) and the true (T) endpoints. Burzykowski and Buyse supplemented this metric of surrogacy with the surrogate threshold effect (STE), which is defined as the minimum value of the causal treatment effect on S for which the predicted causal treatment effect on T exceeds zero. The STE supplements Rtrial2 with a more direct clinically interpretable metric of surrogacy. Alonso et al. proposed to evaluate surrogacy based on the strength of the association between the individual (rather than expected) causal treatment effects on S and T. In the current paper, the individual-level surrogate threshold effect (ISTE) is introduced in the setting where S and T are normally distributed variables. ISTE is defined as the minimum value of the individual causal treatment effect on S for which the lower limit of the prediction interval around the individual causal treatment effect on T exceeds zero. The newly proposed methodology is applied in a case study, and it is illustrated that ISTE has an appealing clinical interpretation. The R package surrogate implements the methodology and a web appendix (supporting information) that details how the analyses can be conducted in practice is provided.

Infectious diseases epidemiology, quantitative methodology, and clinical research in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspective from a European country.

Starting from historic reflections, the current SARS-CoV-2 induced COVID-19 pandemic is examined from various perspectives, in terms of what it implies for the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions, the modeling and monitoring of the epidemic, the development of early-warning systems, the study of mortality, prevalence estimation, diagnostic and serological testing, vaccine development, and ultimately clinical trials. Emphasis is placed on how the pandemic had led to unprecedented speed in methodological and clinical development, the pitfalls thereof, but also the opportunities that it engenders for national and international collaboration, and how it has simplified and sped up procedures. We also study the impact of the pandemic on clinical trials in other indications. We note that it has placed biostatistics, epidemiology, virology, infectiology, and vaccinology, and related fields in the spotlight in an unprecedented way, implying great opportunities, but also the need to communicate effectively, often amidst controversy.

A closed-form estimator for meta-analysis and surrogate markers evaluation.

Estimating complex linear mixed models using an iterative full maximum likelihood estimator can be cumbersome in some cases. With small and unbalanced datasets, convergence problems are common. Also, for large datasets, iterative procedures can be computationally prohibitive. To overcome these computational issues, an unbiased two-stage closed-form estimator for the multivariate linear mixed model is proposed. It is rooted in pseudo-likelihood-based split-sample methodology and useful, for example, when evaluating normally distributed endpoints in a meta-analytic context. However, applications go well beyond this framework. Its statistical and computational performance is assessed via simulation. The method is applied to a study in schizophrenia.

Testing for misspecification in generalized linear mixed models.

Generalized linear mixed models have become a frequently used tool for the analysis of non-Gaussian longitudinal data. Estimation is often based on maximum likelihood theory, which assumes that the underlying probability model is correctly specified. Recent research shows that the results obtained from these models are not always robust against departures from the assumptions on which they are based. Therefore, diagnostic tools for the detection of model misspecifications are of the utmost importance. In this paper, we propose 2 diagnostic tests that are based on 2 equivalent representations of the model information matrix. We evaluate the power of both tests using theoretical considerations as well as via simulation. In the simulations, the performance of the new tools is evaluated in many settings of practical relevance, focusing on misspecification of the random-effects structure. In all the scenarios, the results were encouraging, however, the tests also exhibited inflated Type I error rates when the sample size was small or moderate. Importantly, a parametric bootstrap version of the tests seems to overcome this problem, although more research in this direction may be needed. Finally, both tests were also applied to analyze a real case study in psychiatry.