ArticleComputer methods and programs in biomedicine2023
Exact inference around ordinal measures of association is often not exact.
Article in Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this paper, we build upon the work of DiCiccio and Romano (2017) by extending their permutation test approach, based on the Pearson correlation coefficient in the continuous case, to ordinal measures of association. We investigate commonly used ordinal measures such as the Spearman correlation, Kendall's tau-b, and gamma, which are widely implemented in commercial and open-source software packages for exact testing routines based on generalized hypergeometric probabilities. Similar to DiCiccio and Romano's method, we apply studentization to correct the test statistic, which yields asymptotically valid inference for testing no ordinal association. We present a comprehensive theoretical framework for our approach, followed by a simulation study. Furthermore, we use toy examples to highlight the differences between the exact tests and the asymptotically valid tests. Our findings align with those of DiCiccio and Romano, indicating that exact permutation tests based on ordinal measures of association are often not exact, whereas the asymptotically correct tests perform well for moderate to large sample sizes.
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.