0
$\begingroup$

there are a lot of questions about post-hoc tests for GLMMs on this site and thanks to the replies I almost have my question solved. I want to see if there is a difference in treatment groups over time but for all pairwise comparisons.

My model has a count response (count) with a categorical predictor treatment (as factor with 3 levels: A,B,C) and year (repeated measures of count over time). I also include an interaction to test whether the treatment levels differ over time as follows (simplified here, removed random effects for brevity):

fit <- glmmTMB(count ~ treatment + year + year:treatment)

Using the posts here and here (along with the emmeans vignettes) I have contrasts between groups for each year separately:

emmeans(fit, pairwise ~ treatment | year, at = list(year = c(1, 2, 3,4,5,6)))

$emmeans
year = 1:
 treatment emmean    SE  df lower.CL upper.CL
 A   13.55 0.276 423    13.00     14.1
 B   13.51 0.276 423    12.96     14.0
 C   13.24 0.276 423    12.69     13.8
....
year = 6:
 treatment emmean    SE  df lower.CL upper.CL
 A   12.90 0.241 423    12.43     13.4
 B   12.89 0.241 423    12.42     13.4
 C   12.58 0.241 423    12.11     13.1

But I want all pairwise contrasts for treatment:year to compare treatments within and across all years. This is easy if it were a linear model followed by Tukey's test. The result looks something like:

    A:year1 - B:year1
    A:year1 - B:year2
    A:year1 - B:year3
    A:year2 - B:year2
    A:year2 - B:year3
etc.

Any help greatly appreaciated.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ The multcomp package provides glht which should allow to test for this type of contrasts. See also this application. $\endgroup$
    – chl
    Nov 22, 2020 at 17:38
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the reply. Hmmm...I'm still not able to figure out how glht provides contrasts by treatment:year. I again only get contrasts by treatment, or whatever the factor levels are...? $\endgroup$
    – guest
    Nov 22, 2020 at 21:50
  • $\begingroup$ How does this differ from pairwise ~ treatment * year? (In other words, don't make year a by variable). That will do all pairs from those 18 combinations (warning -- that is 171 comparisons, and the Tukey correction is very conservative. $\endgroup$
    – Russ Lenth
    Nov 23, 2020 at 3:41
  • $\begingroup$ You need to write up the interaction explicitely, either using interaction(), or as suggested by @Russ. $\endgroup$
    – chl
    Nov 23, 2020 at 16:48
  • $\begingroup$ @chl @guest the approach using interaction()' requires starting from scratch: defining that variable, fitting a new model with that variable as the one predictor, and running glht() or emmeans(). glht() is really not very easy to use except for one-factor models, and that's one of the main reasons I wrote emmeans. BTW you can also use glht but specify an emmeans::emm() call for its linfct argument. $\endgroup$
    – Russ Lenth
    Nov 23, 2020 at 18:08

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.