arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2605.23791

Joint Bayesian models for validating spatial health-event databases against a gold standard: separating global and local discrepancies

Mathias Brugel·Florine Kempf·Camille Ternynck·Marta Blangiardo·Michaël Génin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The reuse of medico-administrative and synthetic spatial data may overcome some limitations of population-based registries, provided rigorous validation is performed. However, no tool exists to spatially validate a candidate-for-reuse database (CFRD) against a gold standard (GS). We propose a Bayesian framework for two-dimensional (global and local) map-to-map validation of spatial health-event databases. We consider an error-model family (random [REM] and structured [SEM]) in which the CFRD is modelled as a departure from the GS. Both are compared with a shared component model (SCM). Global disagreement is assessed using the database-specific intercept difference ($RR_{\mathrm{global}}$), while local disagreement is measured by the exceedance probability of the database-specific error term. Disturbance scenarios included null, uniform, clustered, and random perturbations in the CFRD. Sensitivity, specificity, false detection rate, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient assessed detection performance. $RR_{\mathrm{global}}$ accurately recovered map-wide shifts across all models and scenarios. REM and SEM behaved were both sensitive and specific to local discrepancies. SCM was more conservative. Applied to Crohn's disease data from the EPIMAD registry and a CFRD, all models reached the same conclusion: the CFRD reproduced global and local spatial structures with an overall signal about 7\% lower. Extensions to other outcome distributions, spatio-temporal models and calibration constitute natural next steps. \textit{Keywords:} data reuse; spatial database validation; Bayesian hierarchical models; disease mapping; shared component model.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mathias Brugel, Florine Kempf, Camille Ternynck, Marta Blangiardo, Michaël Génin. 2026-05-22. Joint Bayesian models for validating spatial health-event databases against a gold standard: separating global and local discrepancies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23791

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗