IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/lstaxx/v52y2023i4p1217-1236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An IM-based efficient test for non inferiority of the odds ratio between two independent binomial proportions

Author

Listed:
  • Zhining Wang
  • Hua Jin
  • Hezhi Lu

Abstract

In drug development, non inferiority tests are often employed to determine the odds ratio between two independent binomial proportions. Some traditional test statistics for non inferiority based on different statistical schools of thought are available, but they can produce markedly different behaviors. Cornfield's exact conditional test is criticized for its conservativeness, while the Wald and score tests may be applicable for large samples but tend to be liberal with small samples. Although the mid-p value method has recently gained wide acceptance for its better behavior than those of other tests, it has almost no solid theoretical foundation attached to it. In the view of the fiducial school of thought, the fiducial test based on Fisher's fiducial argument also tends to perform unsatisfactorily for small samples. In this paper, we suggest an IM-based efficient test using the randomized plausibility function based on the Inferential Model. We prove that our new method is not only valid but also efficient, i.e., it maintains a nominal type I error rate, and we show, via simulations, that the proposed test also has satisfactory power when compared with those of other competing tests. A numerical example illustrates the proposed method.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhining Wang & Hua Jin & Hezhi Lu, 2023. "An IM-based efficient test for non inferiority of the odds ratio between two independent binomial proportions," Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(4), pages 1217-1236, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:lstaxx:v:52:y:2023:i:4:p:1217-1236
    DOI: 10.1080/03610926.2021.1926507
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03610926.2021.1926507
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03610926.2021.1926507?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
    ---><---

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

    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:taf:lstaxx:v:52:y:2023:i:4:p:1217-1236. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/lsta .

    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.