When you predict a fitted value from a logistic regression model, how are standard errors computed? I mean for the fitted values, not for the coefficients (which involves Fishers information matrix).

I only found out how to get the numbers with R (e.g., here on r-help, or here on Stack Overflow), but I cannot find the formula.

pred <- predict(y.glm, newdata= something, se.fit=TRUE)

If you could provide online source (preferably on a university website), that would be fantastic.

  • $\begingroup$ For linear regression see my answer on Stack Overflow. $\endgroup$
    – jay.sf
    Dec 3, 2022 at 5:32

1 Answer 1


The prediction is just a linear combination of the estimated coefficients. The coefficients are asymptotically normal so a linear combination of those coefficients will be asymptotically normal as well. So if we can obtain the covariance matrix for the parameter estimates we can obtain the standard error for a linear combination of those estimates easily. If I denote the covariance matrix as $\Sigma$ and and write the coefficients for my linear combination in a vector as $C$ then the standard error is just $\sqrt{C' \Sigma C}$

# Making fake data and fitting the model and getting a prediction
dat <- data.frame(x = runif(20), y = rbinom(20, 1, .5))
o <- glm(y ~ x, data = dat)
pred <- predict(o, newdata = data.frame(x=1.5), se.fit = TRUE)

# To obtain a prediction for x=1.5 I'm really
# asking for yhat = b0 + 1.5*b1 so my
# C = c(1, 1.5)
# and vcov applied to the glm object gives me
# the covariance matrix for the estimates
C <- c(1, 1.5)
std.er <- sqrt(t(C) %*% vcov(o) %*% C)

> pred$se.fit
[1] 0.4246289
> std.er
[1,] 0.4246289

We see that the 'by hand' method I show gives the same standard error as reported via predict

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I have one related question. When we predict a value and confidence interval on a linear regression (not logistic), we incorporate the error variance/standard error. But the logistic regression doesn't. Does this difference come from the fact that the logistic regression's observed values are either 0 or 1 and that there's no point in estimating error variance? I feel like we should at least do something, but I may be missing something. $\endgroup$ Aug 10, 2013 at 18:33
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Old question, but this thread helped me just now, so here goes: The logit observes 0 or 1, but it predicts a probability. When you get a standard error of a fitted value, it is on the scale of the linear predictor. You get a confidence interval on the probability by talking logit(fit+/-1.96*se.fit) $\endgroup$ Mar 7, 2014 at 0:58
  • $\begingroup$ Just be aware that this uses the asymptotic normal approx, which can be quite bad for the logistic model (search this site for Hauss-Donner phenomenon). For the coefficients, that can be remedied by for instance likelihood profiling (used by confint function in MASS). That is not possible for the linear predictors ... $\endgroup$ Nov 4, 2016 at 18:50
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ This is incorrect for what the OP asked for; the GLM you fit uses the identity link function, not the logit link function. You should have fit o <- glm(y ~ x, data = dat, family = binomial) instead. Could you please revise? Your explanation works for estimating the log-odds SE (using the type = "link" option), but not the SE when predict uses the type = "response" option. $\endgroup$
    – Zhe Zhang
    Oct 1, 2017 at 17:54

Your Answer

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

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