ArticleScientific reports2024
Confidence interval estimation for the difference of censored zero-inflated gamma distributions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper studies the problem of constructing confidence intervals (CIs) for the difference between coefficients of variation (CV) of two censored zero-inflated gamma distributions. Firstly, we propose a Fiducial inference based method that extends the traditional CI construction method of gamma distribution to the scenario of zero-inflated gamma distributions with censored data. Secondly, we propose a Box-Cox transformation based method, in which not only the sample data needs to be transformed, but also the detection limit of gamma distribution with censored data accordingly. Thirdly, we investigate the Method of Variance Estimate Recovery (MOVER), to combine the previous two gamma distribution CI estimates with three binomial distribution CI estimates, and obtain six combination methods. Furthermore, we conduct Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the performances of the proposed methods, the results indicate that all CI construction methods achieve satisfactory performances in terms of coverage probability, average length and tail error rates. Finally, we perform real data analysis using 11 years of precipitation data from Zhengzhou and Lhasa.
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.