I am currently interpreting some glm's and glmm's based on distributions with log link functions (gaussian - log, and negative binomial) and have started going in a bit of a loop regarding the interpretation of the parameter estimates for the fixed effects. I've found some good posts on CV regarding the interpretation of coefficients where they represent log-odds and odds ratios (1, 2, 3), but not in the case of linear predictors of continuous responses. I've been reading around in everything from primary literature to blogs (a couple of good ones; 4, 5), but the discussions I've come across always tend back toward the different approaches to model selection, or don't consider the random component of mixed models.
From what I understand, in both GLMs and GLMMs, the reported parameter estimates are on the scale of the linear predictor (ie on the opposite side of the link function to the response) and that they are both "conditional" on the chosen distribution and link functions. Furthermore, for GLMMs specifically, the fixed effect parameter estimates are also "conditional" on the grouping within the random effect(s).
If my understanding up to this point is correct, then my questions are:
Can inverse-link transformed parameter estimates from glm's (e.g. exp(beta) for log-linked models) be considered analogous to marginal effects and interpreted as mean population level effects?
How does one interpret the conditional parameter estimates for the fixed effects of glmm's (with the random effects), is it simply by recognising that the reported effect is conditioned on the random effects?
I'm going in loops so any clarification to set me straight or suggested targeted reading would be appreciated - cheers.