Bias, efficiency, and agreement for group-testing regression models.

Bias, efficiency, and agreement for group-testing regression models.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1080/00949650701608990
复制
发表时间:
2009-01-01
影响因子:
1.2
通讯作者:
Tebbs JM
Tebbs JM
中科院分区:
数学4区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Bilder CR;Tebbs JM

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

群体测试包括将单个项目汇集在一起,并同时测试它们是否具有一种罕见的二元特征。无论目标是评估这一特征的流行程度,还是确定那些拥有这种特征的个人,与单独测试受试者相比,集体测试可以提供实质性的好处。最近,分组测试回归模型被提出作为一种在估计特征流行率时纳入协变量的方法。在本文中,我们通过比较从个人和群体测试样本获得的拟合度来检验这些模型。使用相对偏差和效率度量来评估使用不同分组策略得出的估计的准确性和精确度。我们还调查了不同分组策略的个体和群体测试回归估计的一致性,以及群体规模选择的影响。根据组的形成方式,我们的结果表明,与基于个人观察的类似模型相比,组测试回归模型可以执行得非常好。然而,不同的分组策略可以在有限样本中提供非常不同的结果。
Group testing involves pooling individual items together and testing them simultaneously for a rare binary trait. Whether the goal is to estimate the prevalence of the trait or to identify those individuals that possess it, group testing can provide substantial benefits when compared to testing subjects individually. Recently, group-testing regression models have been proposed as a way to incorporate covariates when estimating trait prevalence. In this paper, we examine these models by comparing fits obtained from individual and group testing samples. Relative bias and efficiency measures are used to assess the accuracy and precision of the resulting estimates using different grouping strategies. We also investigate the agreement of individual and group-testing regression estimates for various grouping strategies and the effects of group size selection. Depending on how groups are formed, our results show that group-testing regression models can perform very well when compared to the analogous models based on individual observations. However, different grouping strategies can provide very different results in finite samples.
DOI: 10.2307/1403764
发表时间: 1994-12-01
影响因子: 2
作者:
HAMMICK, PA;GASTWIRTH, JL
通讯作者: GASTWIRTH, JL
DOI: 10.4269/ajtmh.2006.74.779
发表时间: 2006-05-01
影响因子: 3.3
作者:
Katholi, Charles R.;Unnasch, Thomas R.
通讯作者: Unnasch, Thomas R.
DOI: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2000.40060718.x
发表时间: 2000-06-01
期刊: TRANSFUSION
影响因子: 2.9
作者:
Drosten, C;Weber, M;Roth, WK
通讯作者: Roth, WK
DOI: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2005.04234.x
发表时间: 2005-06-01
期刊: TRANSFUSION
影响因子: 2.9
作者:
Heddle, NM;Barty, RL;Kelton, JG
通讯作者: Kelton, JG
DOI: 10.1094/phyto-95-1405
发表时间: 2005-12-01
期刊: PHYTOPATHOLOGY
影响因子: 3.2
作者:
Shah, DA;Dillard, HR;Nault, BA
通讯作者: Nault, BA