{"title":"The superiority of likelihood-based confidence interval for variance estimation in a single group.","authors":"Soo-Min Jung, Minkyu Kim, Kyun-Seop Bae","doi":"10.12793/tcp.2025.33.e1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The χ<sup>2</sup> distribution is commonly used for estimating confidence interval (CI) for variance. However, the validity of the CIs from this method is highly dependent on the assumption that the population follows a normal distribution. Additionally, the Wald CI used in this method does not account for the asymmetry. To address this limitation and provide more accurate interval estimates, especially with relatively small sample sizes, a likelihood interval (LI) approach was adopted. The Likelihood-Based Interval R software package was developed to implement this approach. We conducted a simulation to compare 3 methods for interval estimation of variance in a single group, using the luteinizing hormone () data available with the default R installation and random small sample sizes of 10, 20, and 30 from a standard normal distribution: the conventional χ<sup>2</sup> interval method, the LI method, and the likelihood-based confidence interval (LBCI) method. The average width (standard deviation) of the CIs from the simulation with data was 0.2582 (0.0534) for LBCI, 0.2604 (0.0538) for LI, and 0.2667 (0.0551) for CI, indicating that LBCI produced the narrowest CIs. The interval coverage was 95.24% for CI, 95.38% for LBCI, and 95.45% for LI. In simulations with small sample sizes, LBCI and LI exhibited narrower widths than CI, while the coverage was similar. Therefore, LBCI or LI for variance estimation can be considered a more efficient option than the conventional method.</p>","PeriodicalId":23288,"journal":{"name":"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"33 1","pages":"10-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11976149/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational and Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12793/tcp.2025.33.e1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The χ2 distribution is commonly used for estimating confidence interval (CI) for variance. However, the validity of the CIs from this method is highly dependent on the assumption that the population follows a normal distribution. Additionally, the Wald CI used in this method does not account for the asymmetry. To address this limitation and provide more accurate interval estimates, especially with relatively small sample sizes, a likelihood interval (LI) approach was adopted. The Likelihood-Based Interval R software package was developed to implement this approach. We conducted a simulation to compare 3 methods for interval estimation of variance in a single group, using the luteinizing hormone () data available with the default R installation and random small sample sizes of 10, 20, and 30 from a standard normal distribution: the conventional χ2 interval method, the LI method, and the likelihood-based confidence interval (LBCI) method. The average width (standard deviation) of the CIs from the simulation with data was 0.2582 (0.0534) for LBCI, 0.2604 (0.0538) for LI, and 0.2667 (0.0551) for CI, indicating that LBCI produced the narrowest CIs. The interval coverage was 95.24% for CI, 95.38% for LBCI, and 95.45% for LI. In simulations with small sample sizes, LBCI and LI exhibited narrower widths than CI, while the coverage was similar. Therefore, LBCI or LI for variance estimation can be considered a more efficient option than the conventional method.
期刊介绍:
Translational and Clinical Pharmacology (Transl Clin Pharmacol, TCP) is the official journal of the Korean Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (KSCPT). TCP is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the dissemination of knowledge relating to all aspects of translational and clinical pharmacology. The categories for publication include pharmacokinetics (PK) and drug disposition, drug metabolism, pharmacodynamics (PD), clinical trials and design issues, pharmacogenomics and pharmacogenetics, pharmacometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilence, and human pharmacology. Studies involving animal models, pharmacological characterization, and clinical trials are appropriate for consideration.