Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/CommonHTML/jax.js
Skip to main content

Probability and Cumulative Dice Sums

More Measles: Vaccination Rates and School Funding

I took a look at California's personal belief exemption rate (PBE) for kindergarten vaccinations in Part I. California also provides poverty information for public schools through the Free or Reduced Price Meals data sets, both of which conveniently include California's school codes. Cleaned versions of these data sets and my R code are in my vaccination GitHub.

We can use the school code as a key to join these two data sets. But remember, the FRPM data set only includes data about public schools, so we'll have to retain the private school data for PBEs by doing what's called a left outer join. This still performs a join on the school code key, but if any school codes included in the left data don't have corresponding entries in the right data set we still retain them. The missing values for the right data set in this case are set to NULL.

We can perform a left outer join in R by using "merge" with the option "all.x=TRUE". I'll start by looking at how the PBE rate varies between charter, non-charter public and private schools, so we'll need to replace those missing values for funding source after our join. If the funding source is missing, it's a private school. The FRPM data also denotes non-charter public schools with funding type "", so I'll replace those with "aPublic" for convenience. For factors, R will by default set the reference level to be the level that comes first alphabetically.

library(lme4)
rates <- read.csv("data/cakd1314.csv", header=TRUE, stringsAsFactors=FALSE)
poverty <- read.csv("data/frpm1314.csv", header=TRUE, stringsAsFactors=FALSE)
dim(rates)
dim(poverty)
joined <- merge(rates, poverty, by="School.Code", all.x=TRUE)
dim(joined)
joined$School <- as.factor(paste(joined$County, ":" , joined$City, ":", joined$School.Name.x, sep=""))
joined$City <- as.factor(paste(joined$County, ":" , joined$City, sep=""))
joined$County <- as.factor(joined$County)
joined$Funding <- joined$Charter.Funding.Type
joined[is.na(joined$Funding),]$Funding <- "Private"
joined[(joined$Funding==""),]$Funding <- "aPublic"
joined$Funding <- as.factor(joined$Funding)
joined$Public.Private <- as.factor(joined$Public.Private)
summary(joined$Funding)
summary(joined$Public.Private)
model0 <- cbind(PBE.,Enrollment-PBE.) ~ (1|County) + (1|City) + (1|School)
model1 <- cbind(PBE.,Enrollment-PBE.) ~ (1|County) + (1|City) + (1|School) + Funding
fit0 <- glmer(model0, data=joined, family="binomial")
fit1 <- glmer(model1, data=joined, family="binomial")
anova(fit0)
anova(fit1)
anova(fit0,fit1)
summary(fit1)
fixef(fit1)
ranef(fit1)
view raw pbe_frpm.R hosted with ❤ by GitHub

Here's a subset of the output. The addition of the funding source is an improvement over the model that doesn't include it, and the estimates for the odds ratios for funding source is the highest for directly funded charter schools, followed by locally funded charter schools and private schools. Remember, public schools are the reference level, so for the public level log(odds ratio)=0. Everything else being equal, our odds ratio estimates based on funding source would be: ORpublic=e3.820×e0=0.022ORprivate=e3.820×e0.752=0.047ORcharter-local=e3.820×e1.049=0.063ORcharter-direct=e3.820×e1.348=0.085
Converting to estimated PBE rates, we get: PBEpublic=0.0221+0.022=0.022PBEprivate=0.0471+0.047=0.045PBEcharter-local=0.0631+0.063=0.059PBEcharter-direct=0.0851+0.085=0.078
> joined$Funding <- as.factor(joined$Funding)
> joined$Public.Private <- as.factor(joined$Public.Private)
>
> summary(joined$Funding)
aPublic Directly funded Locally funded
5153 382 172
Not in CS funding model Private
7 1667
> summary(joined$Public.Private)
PRIVATE PUBLIC
1649 5732
>
> model0 <- cbind(PBE.,Enrollment-PBE.) ~ (1|County) + (1|City) + (1|School)
> model1 <- cbind(PBE.,Enrollment-PBE.) ~ (1|County) + (1|City) + (1|School) + Funding
>
> fit0 <- glmer(model0, data=joined, family="binomial")
> fit1 <- glmer(model1, data=joined, family="binomial")
>
> anova(fit0)
Analysis of Variance Table
Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value
> anova(fit1)
Analysis of Variance Table
Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value
Funding 4 523.87 130.97 130.97
> anova(fit0,fit1)
Data: joined
Models:
fit0: cbind(PBE., Enrollment - PBE.) ~ (1 | County) + (1 | City) +
fit0: (1 | School)
fit1: cbind(PBE., Enrollment - PBE.) ~ (1 | County) + (1 | City) +
fit1: (1 | School) + Funding
Df AIC BIC logLik deviance Chisq Chi Df Pr(>Chisq)
fit0 4 25964 25991 -12978 25956
fit1 8 25515 25570 -12749 25499 456.94 4 < 2.2e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
>
> summary(fit1)
Generalized linear mixed model fit by maximum likelihood (Laplace
Approximation) [glmerMod]
Family: binomial ( logit )
Formula: cbind(PBE., Enrollment - PBE.) ~ (1 | County) + (1 | City) +
(1 | School) + Funding
Data: joined
AIC BIC logLik deviance df.resid
25514.8 25569.7 -12749.4 25498.8 6974
Scaled residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-1.4256 -0.6272 -0.1870 0.2439 2.0957
Random effects:
Groups Name Variance Std.Dev.
School (Intercept) 1.1152 1.0560
City (Intercept) 0.8674 0.9314
County (Intercept) 0.8289 0.9104
Number of obs: 6982, groups: School, 6978; City, 919; County, 58
Fixed effects:
Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) -3.81965 0.13730 -27.819 <2e-16 ***
FundingDirectly funded 1.34812 0.07698 17.513 <2e-16 ***
FundingLocally funded 1.04913 0.11150 9.410 <2e-16 ***
FundingNot in CS funding model 0.98645 0.61510 1.604 0.109
FundingPrivate 0.75254 0.04815 15.630 <2e-16 ***
---
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
view raw pbe_funding.txt hosted with ❤ by GitHub

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mining the First 3.5 Million California Unclaimed Property Records

As I mentioned in my previous article  the state of California has over $6 billion in assets listed in its unclaimed property database .  The search interface that California provides is really too simplistic for this type of search, as misspelled names and addresses are both common and no doubt responsible for some of these assets going unclaimed. There is an alternative, however - scrape the entire database and mine it at your leisure using any tools you want. Here's a basic little scraper written in Ruby . It's a slow process, but I've managed to pull about 10% of the full database in the past 24 hours ( 3.5 million out of about 36 million). What does the distribution of these unclaimed assets look like?  Among those with non-zero cash reported amounts: Total value - $511 million Median value - $15 Mean value - $157 90th percentile - $182 95th percentile - $398 98th percentile - $1,000 99th percentile - $1,937 99.9th percentile - $14,203 99.99th perc...

Mixed Models in R - Bigger, Faster, Stronger

When you start doing more advanced sports analytics you'll eventually starting working with what are known as hierarchical, nested or mixed effects models . These are models that contain both fixed and random effects . There are multiple ways of defining fixed vs random random effects , but one way I find particularly useful is that random effects are being "predicted" rather than "estimated", and this in turn involves some "shrinkage" towards the mean. Here's some R code for NCAA ice hockey power rankings using a nested Poisson model (which can be found in my hockey GitHub repository ): model The fixed effects are year , field (home/away/neutral), d_div (NCAA division of the defense), o_div (NCAA division of the offense) and game_length (number of overtime periods); offense (strength of offense), defense (strength of defense) and game_id are all random effects. The reason for modeling team offenses and defenses as random vs fixed effec...

A Bayes' Solution to Monty Hall

For any problem involving conditional probabilities one of your greatest allies is Bayes' Theorem . Bayes' Theorem says that for two events A and B, the probability of A given B is related to the probability of B given A in a specific way. Standard notation: probability of A given B is written Pr(AB) probability of B is written Pr(B) Bayes' Theorem: Using the notation above, Bayes' Theorem can be written:  Pr(AB)=Pr(BA)×Pr(A)Pr(B) Let's apply Bayes' Theorem to the Monty Hall problem . If you recall, we're told that behind three doors there are two goats and one car, all randomly placed. We initially choose a door, and then Monty, who knows what's behind the doors, always shows us a goat behind one of the remaining doors. He can always do this as there are two goats; if we chose the car initially, Monty picks one of the two doors with a goat behind it at random. Assume we pick Door 1 an...