IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v55y2011i1p813-823.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Likelihood-based confidence intervals for the risk ratio using double sampling with over-reported binary data

Author

Listed:
  • Rahardja, Dewi
  • Young, Dean M.

Abstract

In this article we derive likelihood-based confidence intervals for the risk ratio using over-reported two-sample binary data obtained using a double-sampling scheme. The risk ratio is defined as the ratio of two proportion parameters. By maximizing the full likelihood function, we obtain closed-form maximum likelihood estimators for all model parameters. In addition, we derive four confidence intervals: a naive Wald interval, a modified Wald interval, a Fieller-type interval, and an Agresti-Coull interval. All four confidence intervals are illustrated using cervical cancer data. Finally, we conduct simulation studies to assess and compare the coverage probabilities and average lengths of the four interval estimators. We conclude that the modified Wald interval, unlike the other three intervals, produces close-to-nominal confidence intervals under various simulation scenarios examined here and, therefore, is preferred in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahardja, Dewi & Young, Dean M., 2011. "Likelihood-based confidence intervals for the risk ratio using double sampling with over-reported binary data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 813-823, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:1:p:813-823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-9473(10)00277-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rahardja, Dewi & Young, Dean M., 2010. "Credible sets for risk ratios in over-reported two-sample binomial data using the double-sampling scheme," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(5), pages 1281-1287, May.
    2. Paul Gustafson & Nhu D. Le & Refik Saskin, 2001. "Case–Control Analysis with Partial Knowledge of Exposure Misclassification Probabilities," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 598-609, June.
    3. Moors, J.J.A. & van der Genugten, B.B. & Strijbosch, L.W.G., 1997. "Repeated Audit Controls," Discussion Paper 1997-113, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    4. Boese, Doyle H. & Young, Dean M. & Stamey, James D., 2006. "Confidence intervals for a binomial parameter based on binary data subject to false-positive misclassification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(12), pages 3369-3385, August.
    5. Anil Gaba & Robert L. Winkler, 1992. "Implications of Errors in Survey Data: A Bayesian Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(7), pages 913-925, July.
    6. Jeremy York & David Madigan & Ivar Heuch & Rolv Terje Lie, 1995. "Birth Defects Registered by Double Sampling: A Bayesian Approach Incorporating Covariates and Model Uncertainty," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 44(2), pages 227-242, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rahardja, Dewi & Young, Dean M., 2010. "Credible sets for risk ratios in over-reported two-sample binomial data using the double-sampling scheme," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(5), pages 1281-1287, May.
    2. Al-Kandari Noriah M. & Lahiri Partha, 2016. "Prediction of a Function of Misclassified Binary Data," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 17(3), pages 429-447, September.
    3. Noriah M. Al-Kandari & Partha Lahiri, 2016. "Prediction Of A Function Of Misclassified Binary Data," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 17(3), pages 429-447, September.
    4. Boese, Doyle H. & Young, Dean M. & Stamey, James D., 2006. "Confidence intervals for a binomial parameter based on binary data subject to false-positive misclassification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(12), pages 3369-3385, August.
    5. Partha Lahiri & Noriah M. Al-Kandari, 2016. "Prediction of a Function of Misclassified Binary Data," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 17(3), pages 429-447, September.
    6. Dewi Rahardja, 2019. "Bayesian Inference for the Difference of Two Proportion Parameters in Over-Reported Two-Sample Binomial Data Using the Doubly Sample," Stats, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, February.
    7. Paul Gustafson & Nhu D. Le, 2002. "Comparing the Effects of Continuous and Discrete Covariate Mismeasurement, with Emphasis on the Dichotomization of Mismeasured Predictors," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 878-887, December.
    8. Nandram, Balgobin & Zelterman, Daniel, 2007. "Computational Bayesian inference for estimating the size of a finite population," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 2934-2945, March.
    9. Tang, Man-Lai & Qiu, Shi-Fang & Poon, Wai-Yin, 2012. "Confidence interval construction for disease prevalence based on partial validation series," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(5), pages 1200-1220.
    10. Xavier Sala-I-Martin & Gernot Doppelhofer & Ronald I. Miller, 2004. "Determinants of Long-Term Growth: A Bayesian Averaging of Classical Estimates (BACE) Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 813-835, September.
    11. Martijn van Hasselt & Christopher R. Bollinger & Jeremy W. Bray, 2022. "A Bayesian approach to account for misclassification in prevalence and trend estimation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 351-367, March.
    12. Anil Gaba & W. Kip Viscusi, 1998. "Differences in Subjective Risk Thresholds: Worker Groups as an Example," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(6), pages 801-811, June.
    13. Wang Dongxu & Shen Tian & Gustafson Paul, 2012. "Partial Identification arising from Nondifferential Exposure Misclassification: How Informative are Data on the Unlikely, Maybe, and Likely Exposed?," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, November.
    14. Housila Singh & Mariano Ruiz Espejo, 2007. "Double Sampling Ratio-product Estimator of a Finite Population Mean in Sample Surveys," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 71-85.
    15. M. Ruiz & F. J. Giron & C. J. Perez & J. Martin & C. Rojano, 2008. "A Bayesian model for multinomial sampling with misclassified data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 369-382.
    16. Dewi Rahardja, 2022. "Omnibus Tests for Multiple Binomial Proportions via Doubly Sampled Framework with Under-Reported Data," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, April.
    17. Briceön Wiley & Chris Elrod & Phil D. Young & Dean M. Young, 2021. "An integrated‐likelihood‐ratio confidence interval for a proportion based on underreported and infallible data," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 75(3), pages 290-298, August.
    18. Quinino, R. C. & Lee Ho, L., 2004. "Repetitive tests as an economic alternative procedure to control attributes with diagnosis errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 155(1), pages 209-225, May.
    19. Stamey, James D. & Boese, Doyle H. & Young, Dean M., 2008. "Confidence intervals for parameters of two diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 1335-1346, January.
    20. Paul Gustafson & Sander Greenland, 2006. "The Performance of Random Coefficient Regression in Accounting for Residual Confounding," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 62(3), pages 760-768, September.

    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:eee:csdana:v:55:y:2011:i:1:p:813-823. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    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.