ArticleStatistics in medicine2018
Grouping methods for estimating the prevalences of rare traits from complex survey data that preserve confidentiality of respondents.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Augmented Likelihood Approach Incorporating Error-Prone Auxiliary Data Into a Survival Analysis.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Efficient methods for the estimation of the multinomial parameter for the two-trait group testing model.Electronic journal of statistics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Originally, 2-stage group testing was developed for efficiently screening individuals for a disease. In response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, 1-stage group testing was adopted for estimating prevalences of a single or multiple traits from testing groups of size q, so individuals were not tested. This paper extends the methodology of 1-stage group testing to surveys with sample weighted complex multistage-cluster designs. Sample weighted-generalized estimating equations are used to estimate the prevalences of categorical traits while accounting for the error rates inherent in the tests. Two difficulties arise when using group testing in complex samples: (1) How does one weight the results of the test on each group as the sample weights will differ among observations in the same group. Furthermore, if the sample weights are related to positivity of the diagnostic test, then group-level weighting is needed to reduce bias in the prevalence estimation; (2) How does one form groups that will allow accurate estimation of the standard errors of prevalence estimates under multistage-cluster sampling allowing for intracluster correlation of the test results. We study 5 different grouping methods to address the weighting and cluster sampling aspects of complex designed samples. Finite sample properties of the estimators of prevalences, variances, and confidence interval coverage for these grouping methods are studied using simulations. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data are used to illustrate the methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.