当时间服从威布尔分布时,基于对数正态分布的标准偏差比率的广义置信区间。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Pei-Fu Chen, Franklin Dexter
{"title":"当时间服从威布尔分布时,基于对数正态分布的标准偏差比率的广义置信区间。","authors":"Pei-Fu Chen, Franklin Dexter","doi":"10.1007/s10916-024-02073-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Modern anesthetic drugs ensure the efficacy of general anesthesia. Goals include reducing variability in surgical, tracheal extubation, post-anesthesia care unit, or intraoperative response recovery times. Generalized confidence intervals based on the log-normal distribution compare variability between groups, specifically ratios of standard deviations. The alternative statistical approaches, performing robust variance comparison tests, give P-values, not point estimates nor confidence intervals for the ratios of the standard deviations. We performed Monte-Carlo simulations to learn what happens to confidence intervals for ratios of standard deviations of anesthesia-associated times when analyses are based on the log-normal, but the true distributions are Weibull. We used simulation conditions comparable to meta-analyses of most randomized trials in anesthesia, <math><mrow><mi>n</mi> <mo>≈</mo> <mn>25</mn></mrow> </math> and coefficients of variation <math><mrow><mo>≈</mo> <mn>0.30</mn></mrow> </math> . The estimates of the ratios of standard deviations were positively biased, but slightly, the ratios being 0.11% to 0.33% greater than nominal. In contrast, the 95% confidence intervals were very wide (i.e., > 95% of P ≥ 0.05). Although substantive inferentially, the differences in the confidence limits were small from a clinical or managerial perspective, with a maximum absolute difference in ratios of 0.016. Thus, P < 0.05 is reliable, but investigators should plan for Type II errors at greater than nominal rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":16338,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Systems","volume":"48 1","pages":"58"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generalized Confidence Intervals for Ratios of Standard Deviations Based on Log-Normal Distribution when Times Follow Weibull Distributions.\",\"authors\":\"Pei-Fu Chen, Franklin Dexter\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10916-024-02073-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Modern anesthetic drugs ensure the efficacy of general anesthesia. Goals include reducing variability in surgical, tracheal extubation, post-anesthesia care unit, or intraoperative response recovery times. Generalized confidence intervals based on the log-normal distribution compare variability between groups, specifically ratios of standard deviations. The alternative statistical approaches, performing robust variance comparison tests, give P-values, not point estimates nor confidence intervals for the ratios of the standard deviations. We performed Monte-Carlo simulations to learn what happens to confidence intervals for ratios of standard deviations of anesthesia-associated times when analyses are based on the log-normal, but the true distributions are Weibull. We used simulation conditions comparable to meta-analyses of most randomized trials in anesthesia, <math><mrow><mi>n</mi> <mo>≈</mo> <mn>25</mn></mrow> </math> and coefficients of variation <math><mrow><mo>≈</mo> <mn>0.30</mn></mrow> </math> . The estimates of the ratios of standard deviations were positively biased, but slightly, the ratios being 0.11% to 0.33% greater than nominal. In contrast, the 95% confidence intervals were very wide (i.e., > 95% of P ≥ 0.05). Although substantive inferentially, the differences in the confidence limits were small from a clinical or managerial perspective, with a maximum absolute difference in ratios of 0.016. Thus, P < 0.05 is reliable, but investigators should plan for Type II errors at greater than nominal rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Systems\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"58\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02073-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-024-02073-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现代麻醉药物可确保全身麻醉的疗效。目标包括减少手术、气管拔管、麻醉后护理病房或术中反应恢复时间的变异性。基于对数正态分布的广义置信区间可比较组间变异性,特别是标准偏差比。另一种统计方法是进行稳健方差比较测试,给出的是 P 值,而不是标准差比率的点估计值或置信区间。我们进行了蒙特卡罗模拟,以了解当分析以对数正态分布为基础,而真实分布为Weibull时,麻醉相关时间标准差比率的置信区间会发生什么变化。我们使用的模拟条件与大多数麻醉随机试验的荟萃分析相当,即 n ≈ 25,变异系数≈ 0.30。标准偏差比率的估计值呈正偏差,但偏差较小,比率比标称值大 0.11% 至 0.33%。相反,95% 置信区间非常宽(即 P≥0.05 的 >95%)。从临床或管理的角度来看,置信区间的差异虽然是实质性的,但却很小,比率的最大绝对差异为 0.016。因此,P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Generalized Confidence Intervals for Ratios of Standard Deviations Based on Log-Normal Distribution when Times Follow Weibull Distributions.

Generalized Confidence Intervals for Ratios of Standard Deviations Based on Log-Normal Distribution when Times Follow Weibull Distributions.

Modern anesthetic drugs ensure the efficacy of general anesthesia. Goals include reducing variability in surgical, tracheal extubation, post-anesthesia care unit, or intraoperative response recovery times. Generalized confidence intervals based on the log-normal distribution compare variability between groups, specifically ratios of standard deviations. The alternative statistical approaches, performing robust variance comparison tests, give P-values, not point estimates nor confidence intervals for the ratios of the standard deviations. We performed Monte-Carlo simulations to learn what happens to confidence intervals for ratios of standard deviations of anesthesia-associated times when analyses are based on the log-normal, but the true distributions are Weibull. We used simulation conditions comparable to meta-analyses of most randomized trials in anesthesia, n 25 and coefficients of variation 0.30 . The estimates of the ratios of standard deviations were positively biased, but slightly, the ratios being 0.11% to 0.33% greater than nominal. In contrast, the 95% confidence intervals were very wide (i.e., > 95% of P ≥ 0.05). Although substantive inferentially, the differences in the confidence limits were small from a clinical or managerial perspective, with a maximum absolute difference in ratios of 0.016. Thus, P < 0.05 is reliable, but investigators should plan for Type II errors at greater than nominal rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Systems
Journal of Medical Systems 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
1.90%
发文量
83
审稿时长
4.8 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Systems provides a forum for the presentation and discussion of the increasingly extensive applications of new systems techniques and methods in hospital clinic and physician''s office administration; pathology radiology and pharmaceutical delivery systems; medical records storage and retrieval; and ancillary patient-support systems. The journal publishes informative articles essays and studies across the entire scale of medical systems from large hospital programs to novel small-scale medical services. Education is an integral part of this amalgamation of sciences and selected articles are published in this area. Since existing medical systems are constantly being modified to fit particular circumstances and to solve specific problems the journal includes a special section devoted to status reports on current installations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信