Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38215073›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Comparing the variances of several treatments with that of a control treatment: Theory and applications.

Jingsen Kong, Hezhi Lu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jingsen KongSchool of Economics, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Hezhi LuSchool of Economics and Statistics, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8397-3072
Guangzhou University · CNJinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common and important problem in medicine, economics and environmental studies is the comparison of the variances of several treatments with that of a control treatment. Among the existing methods, Spurrier's optimal test based on multivariate F distribution has exact type I error rates. However, it requires equal sample sizes among the treatment groups. To extend the application scope, in this paper, we propose a new efficient test for comparing several variances with a control using the marginal inferential model (MIM). Simulation studies show that the MIM test guarantees the exact type I error rate whether the sample size is equal or unequal. Moreover, the power of the MIM test is competitive with that of Spurrier's optimal test. Finally, two real examples are used to demonstrate the application of the proposed method.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalComputer SimulationSample SizeStatistical Distributions

Identifiers

PMID38215073
PMCPMC10786376
OpenAlexW4390815954

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.