<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic GLM Poisson regression with Firth Adjustment and comparison with R in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/GLM-Poisson-regression-with-Firth-Adjustment-and-comparison-with/m-p/649090#M84159</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I came across a strange results when creating Poisson regression model in JMP and comparing them to R.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am modelling count (Y variable), using model with intercept and single categorical variable mod ("Before mod"/"Modified"). I am using Log(Time) as my offset variable. My sample size is 60.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When running this model, my Parameters Estimates Std Error are very big (1291), but both parameters are significant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54029i6E60019CA523A4BB/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" alt="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Isn't it contradictory, I think that significant parameter, should have low std error?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is more, Intercept estimate is outside of the Lower and Upper CL.&amp;nbsp;Can those two be a bug? Or such information would be an indication to reject poor model.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Additionally, I run a platform with Firth Adjusted Maximum Likelihood, which significantly reduced std error and returned a valid model.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54027i4D9DC68AD4DE89B0/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" alt="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I recreated this model in R, using glm and&amp;nbsp;brglm2 libraries [glmPoisson_firth &amp;lt;- glm(Y ~ mod + offset(Log.Time.), data = data, family = poisson(link = "log"), method = "brglmFit", type = "AS_mean")]. Parameters estimates and standard errors are same, but in contrast to JMP R shows that mod variable is insignificant (R p-value 0.10 vs JMP p-value 0.0062). Can you explain where does the difference come from?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54028i02A7CD1CE0A048EC/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" alt="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ceg1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:31:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Ceg1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-06-22T13:31:48Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>GLM Poisson regression with Firth Adjustment and comparison with R</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/GLM-Poisson-regression-with-Firth-Adjustment-and-comparison-with/m-p/649090#M84159</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I came across a strange results when creating Poisson regression model in JMP and comparing them to R.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am modelling count (Y variable), using model with intercept and single categorical variable mod ("Before mod"/"Modified"). I am using Log(Time) as my offset variable. My sample size is 60.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When running this model, my Parameters Estimates Std Error are very big (1291), but both parameters are significant.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54029i6E60019CA523A4BB/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" alt="Ceg1_3-1687440599801.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Isn't it contradictory, I think that significant parameter, should have low std error?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What is more, Intercept estimate is outside of the Lower and Upper CL.&amp;nbsp;Can those two be a bug? Or such information would be an indication to reject poor model.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Additionally, I run a platform with Firth Adjusted Maximum Likelihood, which significantly reduced std error and returned a valid model.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54027i4D9DC68AD4DE89B0/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" alt="Ceg1_1-1687440367789.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But I recreated this model in R, using glm and&amp;nbsp;brglm2 libraries [glmPoisson_firth &amp;lt;- glm(Y ~ mod + offset(Log.Time.), data = data, family = poisson(link = "log"), method = "brglmFit", type = "AS_mean")]. Parameters estimates and standard errors are same, but in contrast to JMP R shows that mod variable is insignificant (R p-value 0.10 vs JMP p-value 0.0062). Can you explain where does the difference come from?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/54028i02A7CD1CE0A048EC/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" alt="Ceg1_2-1687440489195.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Regards,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Ceg1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2023 13:31:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/GLM-Poisson-regression-with-Firth-Adjustment-and-comparison-with/m-p/649090#M84159</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ceg1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-22T13:31:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: GLM Poisson regression with Firth Adjustment and comparison with R</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/GLM-Poisson-regression-with-Firth-Adjustment-and-comparison-with/m-p/651272#M84207</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The likelihood ratio test (LRT) is not based on the standard error. It is based on the chi-square associated with adding this term to the model.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The estimate of the intercept, -17.6756, is within the stated confidence interval, -178.3917 to -9.458.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The R function uses a Z test assuming normal errors and known variance. JMP is using the LRT, which provides better coverage.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2023 13:07:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/GLM-Poisson-regression-with-Firth-Adjustment-and-comparison-with/m-p/651272#M84207</guid>
      <dc:creator>Mark_Bailey</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-06-23T13:07:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

