---
title: "Biostat 200C Homework 2"
subtitle: Due Apr 25 @ 11:59PM
date: today
format:
  html:
    theme: cosmo
    embed-resources: true
    number-sections: true
    toc: true
    toc-depth: 4
    toc-location: left
    code-fold: false
engine: knitr
knitr:
  opts_chunk: 
    fig.align: 'center'
    # fig.width: 6
    # fig.height: 4
    message: FALSE
    cache: false
---

```{r setup, include=FALSE}
knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE, cache = FALSE)
```

To submit homework, please upload both Rmd and html files to Bruinlearn by the deadline.

## Q1. CFR of COVID-19 (90pts)

Of primary interest to public is the risk of dying from COVID-19. A commonly used measure is case fatality rate/ratio/risk (CFR), which is defined as
$$
\frac{\text{number of deaths from disease}}{\text{number of diagnosed cases of disease}}.
$$
Apparently CFR is not a fixed constant; it changes with time, location, and other factors. Also CFR is different from the infection fatality rate (IFR), the probability that someone infected with COVID-19 dies from it. 

In this exercise, we use logistic regression to study how US county-level CFR changes according to demographic information and some health-, education-, and economy-indicators.

### Data sources

- `04-04-2020.csv.gz`: The data on COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths on 2020-04-04 is retrieved from the [Johns Hopkins COVID-19 data repository](https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19). It was downloaded from this [link](https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19) (commit 0174f38). This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 10, 2023. It is now read-only. You can download data from box: <https://ucla.box.com/s/brb3vz4nwoq8pjkcutxncymqw583d39l>

- `us-county-health-rankings-2020.csv.gz`: The 2020 County Health Ranking Data was released by [County Health Rankings](https://www.countyhealthrankings.org). The data was downloaded from the [Kaggle Uncover COVID-19 Challenge](https://www.kaggle.com/roche-data-science-coalition/uncover) (version 1). You can download data from box: <https://ucla.box.com/s/brb3vz4nwoq8pjkcutxncymqw583d39l>

### Sample code for data preparation

Load the `tidyverse` package for data manipulation and visualization.
```{r}
# tidyverse of data manipulation and visualization
library(tidyverse)
```
Read in the data of COVID-19 cases reported on 2020-04-04.
```{r}
county_count <- read_csv("./datasets/04-04-2020.csv.gz") %>%
  # cast fips into dbl for use as a key for joining tables
  mutate(FIPS = as.numeric(FIPS)) %>%
  filter(Country_Region == "US") %>%
  print(width = Inf)
```
Standardize the variable names by changing them to lower case.
```{r}
names(county_count) <- str_to_lower(names(county_count))
```
Sanity check by displaying the unique US states and territories:
```{r}
county_count %>%
  select(province_state) %>%
  distinct() %>%
  arrange(province_state) %>%
  print(n = Inf)
```
We want to exclude entries from `Diamond Princess`, `Grand Princess`, `Guam`, `Northern Mariana Islands`, `Puerto Rico`, `Recovered`, and `Virgin Islands`, and only consider counties from 50 states and DC.
```{r}
county_count <- county_count %>%
  filter(!(province_state %in% c("Diamond Princess", "Grand Princess", 
                                 "Recovered", "Guam", "Northern Mariana Islands", 
                                 "Puerto Rico", "Virgin Islands"))) %>%
  print(width = Inf)
```
Graphical summarize the COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths on 2020-04-04 by state.
```{r}
county_count %>%
  # turn into long format for easy plotting
  pivot_longer(confirmed:recovered, 
               names_to = "case", 
               values_to = "count") %>%
  group_by(province_state) %>%
  ggplot() + 
  geom_col(mapping = aes(x = province_state, y = `count`, fill = `case`)) + 
  # scale_y_log10() + 
  labs(title = "US COVID-19 Situation on 2020-04-04", x = "State") + 
  theme(axis.text.x = element_text(angle = 90))
```

Read in the 2020 county-level health ranking data.
```{r}
county_info <- read_csv("./datasets/us-county-health-rankings-2020.csv.gz") %>%
  filter(!is.na(county)) %>%
  # cast fips into dbl for use as a key for joining tables
  mutate(fips = as.numeric(fips)) %>%
  select(fips, 
         state,
         county,
         percent_fair_or_poor_health, 
         percent_smokers, 
         percent_adults_with_obesity, 
         # food_environment_index,
         percent_with_access_to_exercise_opportunities, 
         percent_excessive_drinking,
         # teen_birth_rate, 
         percent_uninsured,
         # primary_care_physicians_rate,
         # preventable_hospitalization_rate,
         # high_school_graduation_rate,
         percent_some_college,
         percent_unemployed,
         percent_children_in_poverty,
         # `80th_percentile_income`,
         # `20th_percentile_income`,
         percent_single_parent_households,
         # violent_crime_rate,
         percent_severe_housing_problems,
         overcrowding,
         # life_expectancy,
         # age_adjusted_death_rate,
         percent_adults_with_diabetes,
         # hiv_prevalence_rate,
         percent_food_insecure,
         # percent_limited_access_to_healthy_foods,
         percent_insufficient_sleep,
         percent_uninsured_2,
         median_household_income,
         average_traffic_volume_per_meter_of_major_roadways,
         percent_homeowners,
         # percent_severe_housing_cost_burden,
         population_2,
         percent_less_than_18_years_of_age,
         percent_65_and_over,
         percent_black,
         percent_asian,
         percent_hispanic,
         percent_female,
         percent_rural) %>%
  print(width = Inf)
```

For stability in estimating CFR, we restrict to counties with $\ge 5$ confirmed cases.
```{r}
county_count <- county_count %>%
  filter(confirmed >= 5)
```
We join the COVID-19 count data and county-level information using FIPS (Federal Information Processing System) as key. 
```{r}
county_data <- county_count %>%
  left_join(county_info, by = "fips") %>%
  print(width = Inf)
```
Numerical summaries of each variable:
```{r}
summary(county_data)
```
List rows in `county_data` that don't have a match in `county_count`:
```{r}
county_data %>%
  filter(is.na(state) & is.na(county)) %>%
  print(n = Inf)
```
We found there are some rows that miss `fips`. 
```{r}
county_count %>%
  filter(is.na(fips)) %>%
  select(fips, admin2, province_state) %>%
  print(n = Inf)
```
We need to (1) manually set the `fips` for some counties, (2) discard those `Unassigned`, `unassigned` or `Out of`, and (3) try to join with `county_info` again.
```{r}
county_data <- county_count %>%
  # manually set FIPS for some counties
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "DeKalb" & province_state == "Tennessee", 47041, fips)) %>%
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "DeSoto" & province_state == "Florida", 12027, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Dona Ana" & province_state == "New Mexico", 35013, fips)) %>% 
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Dukes and Nantucket" & province_state == "Massachusetts", 25019, fips)) %>% 
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Fillmore" & province_state == "Minnesota", 27045, fips)) %>%  
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Harris" & province_state == "Texas", 48201, fips)) %>%  
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Kenai Peninsula" & province_state == "Alaska", 2122, fips)) %>%  
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "LaSalle" & province_state == "Illinois", 17099, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "LaSalle" & province_state == "Louisiana", 22059, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Lac qui Parle" & province_state == "Minnesota", 27073, fips)) %>%  
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Manassas" & province_state == "Virginia", 51683, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Matanuska-Susitna" & province_state == "Alaska", 2170, fips)) %>%
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "McDuffie" & province_state == "Georgia", 13189, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "McIntosh" & province_state == "Georgia", 13191, fips)) %>%
  #mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "McKean" & province_state == "Pennsylvania", 42083, fips)) %>%
  mutate(fips = ifelse(admin2 == "Weber" & province_state == "Utah", 49057, fips)) %>%
  filter(!(is.na(fips) | str_detect(admin2, "Out of") | str_detect(admin2, "Unassigned"))) %>%
  left_join(county_info, by = "fips") %>%
  print(width = Inf)
```
Summarize again
```{r}
summary(county_data)
```
If there are variables with missing value for many counties, we go back and remove those variables from consideration.

Let's create a final data frame for analysis.
```{r}
county_data <- county_data %>%
  mutate(state = as.factor(state)) %>%
  select(county, confirmed, deaths, state, percent_fair_or_poor_health:percent_rural)
summary(county_data)
```
Display the 10 counties with highest CFR.
```{r}
county_data %>%
  mutate(cfr = deaths / confirmed) %>%
  select(county, state, confirmed, deaths, cfr) %>%
  arrange(desc(cfr)) %>%
  top_n(10)
```
Write final data into a csv file for future use.
```{r}
write_csv(county_data, "./datasets/covid19-county-data-20200404.csv.gz")
```

### Note:

Given that the datasets were collected in the middle of the pandemic, what assumptions of CFR might be violated by defining CFR as `deaths/confirmed` from this data set? 

Because COVID-19 pandemic was still ongoing in 2020, we should realize some critical assumptions for defining CFR are not met using this datasets.

1. Numbers of confirmed cases do not reflect the number of diagnosed people. This is mainly limited by the availability of testing.

2. Some confirmed cases may die later.

With acknowledgement of these severe limitations, we continue to use `deaths/confirmed` as a very rough proxy of CFR.

### Q1.1 (5pts)

Read and run above code to generate a data frame `county_data` that includes county-level COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths, demographic, and health related information. 

### Q1.2(5pts)

What assumptions of logistic regression may be violated by this data set?

### Q1.3 (10pts)

Run a logistic regression, using variables `state`, ..., `percent_rural` as predictors. 

### Q1.4 (10pts)

Interpret the regression coefficients of 3 significant predictors with p-value <0.05.

### Q1.5 (10pts)

Apply analysis of deviance to (1) evaluate the goodness of fit of the model and (2) compare the model to the intercept-only model. 

### Q1.6 (10pts)

Perform analysis of deviance to evaluate the significance of each predictor. Display the 10 most significant predictors.

### Q1.7 (5pts)

Construct confidence intervals of regression coefficients.

### Q1.8 (5pts)

Plot the deviance residuals against the fitted values. Are there potential outliers?

### Q1.9 (5pts)

Plot the half-normal plot. Are there potential outliers in predictor space?

### Q1.10 (10pts)

Find the best sub-model using the AIC criterion.

### Q1.11 (15pts)

Find the best sub-model using the lasso with cross validation.

## Q2. Odds ratios (20pts)

Consider a $2 \times 2$ contingency table from a prospective study in which people who were or were not exposed to some pollutant are followed up and, after several years, categorized according to the presense or absence of a disease. Following table shows the probabilities for each cell. The odds of disease for either exposure group is $O_i = \pi_i / (1 - \pi_i)$, for $i = 1,2$, and so the odds ratio is
$$
\phi = \frac{O_1}{O_2} = \frac{\pi_1(1 - \pi_2)}{\pi_2 (1 - \pi_1)}
$$
is a measure of the relative likelihood of disease for the exposed and not exposed groups.

|             | Diseased | Not diseased |
|:-----------:|----------|--------------|
| Exposed     | $\pi_1$  | $1 - \pi_1$  |
| Not exposed | $\pi_2$  | $1 - \pi_2$  |

### Q2.1 (10pts)

For the simple logistic model
$$
\pi_i = \frac{e^{\beta_i}}{1 + e^{\beta_i}}, 
$$
show that if there is no difference between the exposed and not exposed groups (i.e., $\beta_1 = \beta_2$), then $\phi = 1$.

### Q2.2(10pts)

Consider $J$ $2 \times 2$ tables, one for each level $x_j$ of a factor, such as age group, with $j=1,\ldots, J$. For the logistic model
$$
\pi_{ij} = \frac{e^{\alpha_i + \beta_i x_j}}{1 + e^{\alpha_i + \beta_i x_j}}, \quad i = 1,2, \quad j= 1,\ldots, J.
$$
Show that $\log \phi$ is constant over all tables if $\beta_1 = \beta_2$.

## Q3. ELMR Chapter 4 Excercise 3 (30pts)



