Abstract
Recently Bayesian methods have been widely used in disease mapping. Hierarchical (h-) likelihood methods allow reliable likelihood inference in random-effect models and it is therefore interesting to compare h-likelihood and Bayesian methods. For comparison we consider three examples: low birth weight and cancer mortality data in South Carolina and lip cancer data in Scotland. Mean estimates from both h-likelihood and Bayesian approaches are almost identical, while variance-component estimates can be somewhat different, depending upon choice of priors.
| Translated title of the contribution | A comparison of the hierarchical likelihood and Bayesian approaches to spatial epidemiological modelling |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Pages (from-to) | 809 - 821 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Environmetrics |
| Volume | 18 (7) |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Nov 2007 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher: WileyUN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of the hierarchical likelihood and Bayesian approaches to spatial epidemiological modelling'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver