IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssc/v28y1979i2p144-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Comparison of Treatment with Control Group Means in Toxicological Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Eryl A. C. Shirley

Abstract

Three methods of comparing group means in the standard four group toxicological study, where three groups of animals receiving increasing doses of a substance are contrasted with a zero dose control group, are compared by estimating powers using Monte Carlo methods. It is found that, in general, Bartholomew's test for ordered means is the most powerful, but that Williams's test has virtually the same power at detecting effects at the all‐important low dose level.

Suggested Citation

  • Eryl A. C. Shirley, 1979. "The Comparison of Treatment with Control Group Means in Toxicological Studies," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 28(2), pages 144-151, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:28:y:1979:i:2:p:144-151
    DOI: 10.2307/2346731
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/2346731
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/2346731?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hui Quan & Thomas Capizzi, 1999. "Adjusted Regression Trend Test for a Multicenter Clinical Trial," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 460-462, June.
    2. Miwa, Tetsuhisa & Hayter, A. J. & Liu, Wei, 2000. "Calculations of level probabilities for normal random variables with unequal variances with applications to Bartholomew's test in unbalanced one-way models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 17-32, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:28:y:1979:i:2:p:144-151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.