getCITED   
  Home     Search     Add Content     Reports     Help  
Edit Publication | Edit Contributors | Delete Publication | Edit References | Edit Citations
Add to Bookstack | Show Bookstack | Change Bookstack

Binomial Distribution Sample Confidence Intervals Estimation 5. Odds Ratio

Post a Comment
CONTRIBUTORS:
  Author Sorana BOLBOACA (Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy Cluj-Napoca)
JOURNAL:
  Leonardo Journal of Sciences, 3(4), 26 - 43.
YEAR: 2004
PUB TYPE: Journal Article
SUBJECT(S): None
DISCIPLINE: Medicine
HTTP: http://ljs.academicdirect.org/A04/26_43.pdf
LANGUAGE: English
PUB ID: 103-435-588 (Last edited on 2007/06/28 01:30:26 GMT-6)
SPONSOR(S):
 
ABSTRACT:
Evaluation of the strength of association between predisposing or causal factors and disease can be express as odds ratio in case-control studies. In order to interpret correctly a point estimation of odds ratio we need to look also to its confidence intervals quality. The aim of this paper is to introduce three new methods of computing the confidence intervals, R2AC, R2Binomial, and R2BinomialC, and compare the performances with the asymptotic method called R2Wald. In order to assess the methods a PHP program was develop. First, the upper and lower confidence boundaries for all implemented methods were computes and graphically represented. Second, the experimental errors, standard deviations of the experimental errors and deviation relative to the imposed significance level á = 5% were assessed. Estimating the experimental errors and standard deviations at central point for given sample sizes was the third criterion. The R2Wald and R2AC methods were assessed using random binomial variables (X, Y) and sample sizes (m, n) from 4 to 1000. The methods based on the original method Binomial adjusted for odds ratio (R2Binomial, R2BinomialC functions) obtain systematically the lowest deviation of the experimental errors percent relative to the expected error percent and the R2AC method, the closest average of the experimental errors percent to the expected error percent.
STATISTICS
Click on # to view
 Citations   4 
 References   2 
 Comments  
 Quality      0/0.00 
 Interest      0/0.00 
 View(er)s   1/672 
Quality
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Interest
  N/A
High
  7
  6
  5
  4
  3
  2
  1
Low
Prev | Next

    ABOUT getCITED   |    CONTACT US   |    USER INFO   |    PREFERENCES   |    PRIVACY   |    LOG IN   
Comments? Suggestions? Send them to feedback@getCITED.org.

Copyright © 2000-2006 getCITED Inc. All Rights Reserved.