Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28630535›Full record

ArticleJournal of nonparametric statistics2016

Tests for stochastic ordering under biased sampling.

Hsin-Wen Chang, Hammou El Barmi, Ian W McKeague

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nonparametric statistics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Hsin-Wen ChangInstitute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica, Taipei 11529, Taiwan.
Hammou El BarmiDepartment of Statistics and Computer Information Systems, Baruch College, The City University of New York, New York, NY 10010, U.S.A.
Ian W McKeagueDepartment of Biostatistics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, U.S.A.

Funding

Post-selection inference and trajectory analysisR01GM095722 · NIGMS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI MCKEAGUE, IAN WRAY · 2011 to 2018
$1.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM095722
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In two-sample comparison problems it is often of interest to examine whether one distribution function majorizes the other, i.e., for the presence of stochastic ordering. This paper develops a nonparametric test for stochastic ordering from size-biased data, allowing the pattern of the size bias to differ between the two samples. The test is formulated in terms of a maximally-selected local empirical likelihood statistic. A Gaussian multiplier bootstrap is devised to calibrate the test. Simulation results show that the proposed test outperforms an analogous Wald-type test, and that it provides substantially greater power over ignoring the size bias. The approach is illustrated using data on blood alcohol concentration of drivers involved in car accidents, where the size bias is due to drunker drivers being more likely to be involved in accidents. Further, younger drivers tend to be more affected by alcohol, so in making comparisons with older drivers the analysis is adjusted for differences in the patterns of size bias.

Indexed as

empirical likelihoodlength biasorder-restricted inferencesize biasweighted distributions

Identifiers

PMID28630535
PMCPMC5473665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.