arXiv subjects

James Stamey

Publications and source records attributed to James Stamey.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Bayesian Quantile Regression for Misclassified Binary Data with an Application to Spousal Violence Reporting

Survey responses on socially undesirable behaviors, such as self-reported spousal violence, are often subject to underreporting due to social stigma, fear of retaliation, and other reporting pressures. When such data are analyzed using standard econometric models that focus on conditional means, such as probit and logit models, the resulting estimates are likely to be biased and can obscure heterogeneity in covariate effects. To address these challenges, we propose a Bayesian binary quantile regression framework that accounts for misclassification and provides quantile-specific effects for the latent true response. The framework incorporates false-negative and false-positive probabilities to capture reporting errors and employs a novel partially collapsed Gibbs sampler for estimation. We also discuss the computation of covariate effects and marginal likelihood for Bayesian model comparison. Simulation studies under various settings (prior effective sample size, misclassification rates, and prior distribution) show that accounting for misclassification improves inference across quantiles relative to models that ignore reporting errors. We apply the framework to women's self-reported spousal violence and find that underreporting of spousal violence exceeds overreporting across quantiles, while model comparisons using marginal likelihood generally favor the quantile model with misclassification and yield different conclusions about the determinants of reported violence.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

Real Effect or Bias? Best Practices for Evaluating the Robustness of Real-World Evidence through Quantitative Sensitivity Analysis for Unmeasured Confounding

The assumption of no unmeasured confounders is a critical but unverifiable assumption required for causal inference yet quantitative sensitivity analyses to assess robustness of real-world evidence remains underutilized. The lack of use is likely in part due to complexity of implementation and often specific and restrictive data requirements required for application of each method. With the advent of sensitivity analyses methods that are broadly applicable in that they do not require identification of a specific unmeasured confounder, along with publicly available code for implementation, roadblocks toward broader use are decreasing. To spur greater application, here we present a best practice guidance to address the potential for unmeasured confounding at both the design and analysis stages, including a set of framing questions and an analytic toolbox for researchers. The questions at the design stage guide the research through steps evaluating the potential robustness of the design while encouraging gathering of additional data to reduce uncertainty due to potential confounding. At the analysis stage, the questions guide researchers to quantifying the robustness of the observed result and providing researchers with a clearer indication of the robustness of their conclusions. We demonstrate the application of the guidance using simulated data based on a real-world fibromyalgia study, applying multiple methods from our analytic toolbox for illustration purposes.

stat.ME↗