Suppr超能文献

用于剂量确定的多种测试程序。

Multiple test procedures for dose finding.

作者信息

Tamhane A C, Hochberg Y, Dunnett C W

机构信息

Department of Statistics, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208-4070, USA.

出版信息

Biometrics. 1996 Mar;52(1):21-37.

PMID:8934584
Abstract

The problem of identifying the lowest dose level for which the mean response differs from that at the zero dose level is considered. A general framework for stepwise testing procedures that use contrasts among the dose level means is proposed. Using this framework, several new procedures are derived. These and some existing procedures, including that of Williams (1971, Biometrics 27, 103-117; 1972, Biometrics 28, 519-531), are compared analytically and by an extensive simulation study for the normal theory balanced one-way layout case. It is pointed out that the procedures based on the so-called step and basin contrasts proposed by Ruberg (1989, Journal of American Statistical Association 84, 816-822) have excessively high type I familywise error rates (FWEs) and, hence, they should not be used. Some findings of the simulation study are as follows: For monotone dose mean configurations, Williams' procedure and two step-down test procedures based on Helmert and linear contrasts offer the best performance. For nonmonotone dose mean configurations, the performance of Williams' procedure does degrade somewhat, but the other two procedures are still the best. For more complex designs, a simple step-down test procedure that uses any alpha-level tests (not necessarily t-tests) to compare each dose level with the zero dose level controls the FWE and is the only alternative available, but its power is rather low, especially under nonmonotone configurations. Step-up procedures are generally dominated by step-down procedures when the same contrasts are used although the differences are not great.

摘要

考虑了识别平均反应与零剂量水平下的平均反应不同的最低剂量水平的问题。提出了一种使用剂量水平均值之间对比的逐步检验程序的通用框架。利用该框架,推导了几种新的程序。对这些程序以及一些现有程序,包括Williams(1971年,《生物统计学》27卷,103 - 117页;1972年,《生物统计学》28卷,519 - 531页)的程序,针对正态理论平衡单向布局情况进行了分析比较,并通过广泛的模拟研究进行了比较。指出基于Ruberg(1989年,《美国统计协会杂志》84卷,816 - 822页)提出的所谓阶梯和盆地对比的程序具有过高的I型家族性错误率(FWE),因此不应使用。模拟研究的一些结果如下:对于单调剂量均值配置,Williams程序以及基于Helmert和线性对比的两种逐步检验程序表现最佳。对于非单调剂量均值配置,Williams程序的性能确实会有所下降,但其他两种程序仍然是最佳的。对于更复杂的设计,一种简单的逐步检验程序,即使用任何α水平检验(不一定是t检验)将每个剂量水平与零剂量水平进行比较,可控制FWE,并且是唯一可用的替代方法,但其功效相当低,尤其是在非单调配置下。当使用相同对比时,逐步检验程序通常被逐步检验程序主导,尽管差异不大。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验