Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21167043›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health geographics2010

Gumbel based p-value approximations for spatial scan statistics.

Allyson M Abrams, Ken Kleinman, Martin Kulldorff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health geographics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Geographical Clusters of Rape in the United States: 2000-2012.Statistics and public policy (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2015
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Data-driven inference for the spatial scan statistic.International journal of health geographics · 2011
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Allyson M AbramsDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, USA. allyson_abrams@harvardpilgrim.org
Ken Kleinman
Martin Kulldorff

Funding

Modeling Health System Infectious Disease DataU01GM076672 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI HUANG, SUSAN S. · 2006 to 2010
$3.0M
Tests for Spatial Randomness in Cancer MapsR01CA095979 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT SCH OF MED/DNT · PI KULLDORFF, MARTIN · 2002 to 2005
$1.6M
NCI NIH HHS R01CA095979NIGMS NIH HHS U01GM076672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe spatial and space-time scan statistics are commonly applied for the detection of geographical disease clusters. Monte Carlo hypothesis testing is typically used to test whether the geographical clusters are statistically significant as there is no known way to calculate the null distribution analytically. In Monte Carlo hypothesis testing, simulated random data are generated multiple times under the null hypothesis, and the p-value is r/(R + 1), where R is the number of simulated random replicates of the data and r is the rank of the test statistic from the real data compared to the same test statistics calculated from each of the random data sets. A drawback to this powerful technique is that each additional digit of p-value precision requires ten times as many replicated datasets, and the additional processing can lead to excessive run times.

resultsWe propose a new method for obtaining more precise p-values with a given number of replicates. The collection of test statistics from the random replicates is used to estimate the true distribution of the test statistic under the null hypothesis by fitting a continuous distribution to these observations. The choice of distribution is critical, and for the spatial and space-time scan statistics, the extreme value Gumbel distribution performs very well while the gamma, normal and lognormal distributions perform poorly. From the fitted Gumbel distribution, we show that it is possible to estimate the analytical p-value with great precision even when the test statistic is far out in the tail beyond any of the test statistics observed in the simulated replicates. In addition, Gumbel-based rejection probabilities have smaller variability than Monte Carlo-based rejection probabilities, suggesting that the proposed approach may result in greater power than the true Monte Carlo hypothesis test for a given number of replicates.

conclusionsFor large data sets, it is often advantageous to replace computer intensive Monte Carlo hypothesis testing with this new method of fitting a Gumbel distribution to random data sets generated under the null, in order to reduce computation time and obtain much more precise p-values and slightly higher statistical power.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalEpidemiologic MethodsSmall-Area AnalysisSpace-Time ClusteringCluster AnalysisGeographyHumansModels, StatisticalMonte Carlo MethodTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID21167043
PMCPMC3018432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.