Tell me more ×
Cross Validated is a question and answer site for statisticians, data analysts, data miners and data visualization experts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have counts of people with a condition, by age (5-year groups), sex, and area (100-200 areas).

For each area, I have:

  • estimated population by age (5-year groups) and sex,
  • estimated population percent living in city, small town or rural (sum to 100%),
  • estimated population in high, middle and low socioeconomic status (sum to 100%), and
  • estimated population proportion treated (via food or water supply fortification).

I know nothing about individual-level correlation between rurality and socioeconomic status (or even if it's the same across areas). I expect proportion treated is near 100% in cities, lower in small towns, much lower in rural areas.

Researcher wants adjusted rate (or odds) ratios for having the condition (and p-values) for rural vs cities, low vs high SES, untreated vs treated, young vs older.

Can I produce valid estimates?

If so, how should I model it?

share|improve this question

1 Answer

Multilevel analysis based on aggregate data leads to ecological fallacy. Here is an interesting paper to read: http://www.stanford.edu/class/ed260/freedman549.pdf

share|improve this answer
3  
Could you perhaps summarize the main points of that paper so that this reply remains self-contained. – chl Jul 17 '12 at 9:56

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.