Standard Errors of Differences

1979 ◽  
pp. 120-124
Author(s):  
Albert K. Kurtz ◽  
Samuel T. Mayo
Keyword(s):  
Standard Errors

Multi-Center Calibration of the Second Reference Material for Thromboplastin, Rabbit, Plain, Coded CRM 149R

1991 ◽  
Vol 65 (03) ◽  
pp. 263-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
A M H P van den Besselaar ◽  
R M Bertina
Keyword(s):  
Reference Material ◽  
Standard Error ◽  
Standard Errors ◽  
Sensitivity Index ◽  
Long Term Stability ◽  
Significant Bias ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
International Sensitivity Index

SummaryIn a collaborative trial of eleven laboratories which was performed mainly within the framework of the European Community Bureau of Reference (BCR), a second reference material for thromboplastin, rabbit, plain, was calibrated against its predecessor RBT/79. This second reference material (coded CRM 149R) has a mean International Sensitivity Index (ISI) of 1.343 with a standard error of the mean of 0.035. The standard error of the ISI was determined by combination of the standard errors of the ISI of RBT/79 and the slope of the calibration line in this trial.The BCR reference material for thromboplastin, human, plain (coded BCT/099) was also included in this trial for assessment of the long-term stability of the relationship with RBT/79. The results indicated that this relationship has not changed over a period of 8 years. The interlaboratory variation of the slope of the relationship between CRM 149R and RBT/79 was significantly lower than the variation of the slope of the relationship between BCT/099 and RBT/79. In addition to the manual technique, a semi-automatic coagulometer according to Schnitger & Gross was used to determine prothrombin times with CRM 149R. The mean ISI of CRM 149R was not affected by replacement of the manual technique by this particular coagulometer.Two lyophilized plasmas were included in this trial. The mean slope of relationship between RBT/79 and CRM 149R based on the two lyophilized plasmas was the same as the corresponding slope based on fresh plasmas. Tlowever, the mean slope of relationship between RBT/79 and BCT/099 based on the two lyophilized plasmas was 4.9% higher than the mean slope based on fresh plasmas. Thus, the use of these lyophilized plasmas induced a small but significant bias in the slope of relationship between these thromboplastins of different species.

scholarly journals Accuracy of Doppler Determinations of Station Positions

1972 ◽  
Vol 48 ◽  
pp. 101-103
Author(s):  
R. J. Anderle
Keyword(s):  
Elevation Angle ◽  
High Elevation ◽  
Time Of Day ◽  
Satellite Observations ◽  
Standard Errors ◽  
Lower Elevation ◽  
Self Consistent

Locations of Doppler satellite observing stations have been revised to obtain a set which is more self-consistent and more consistent with the CIO pole. Residuals of satellite observations for 1970 have been analyzed using the new coordinates to determine mean and standard errors for five days of observations of latitude versus station, time of day, and elevation angle. The accuracy of the determination of latitude is about 4 meters at moderate and high elevation angles. But since more satellite passes occur at lower elevation angles, the accuracy of determination of a component of position based on five days of observation of one satellite is only about 2 meters.

scholarly journals Understanding, Choosing, and Unifying Multilevel and Fixed Effect Approaches

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Chad Hazlett ◽  
Leonard Wainstein
Keyword(s):  
Random Effects ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Multilevel Models ◽  
Standard Errors ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Fe Model ◽  
Grouped Data ◽  
Coefficient Estimates ◽  
Political Science Education ◽  
Robust Standard Errors

Abstract When working with grouped data, investigators may choose between “fixed effects” models (FE) with specialized (e.g., cluster-robust) standard errors, or “multilevel models” (MLMs) employing “random effects.” We review the claims given in published works regarding this choice, then clarify how these approaches work and compare by showing that: (i) random effects employed in MLMs are simply “regularized” fixed effects; (ii) unmodified MLMs are consequently susceptible to bias—but there is a longstanding remedy; and (iii) the “default” MLM standard errors rely on narrow assumptions that can lead to undercoverage in many settings. Our review of over 100 papers using MLM in political science, education, and sociology show that these “known” concerns have been widely ignored in practice. We describe how to debias MLM’s coefficient estimates, and provide an option to more flexibly estimate their standard errors. Most illuminating, once MLMs are adjusted in these two ways the point estimate and standard error for the target coefficient are exactly equal to those of the analogous FE model with cluster-robust standard errors. For investigators working with observational data and who are interested only in inference on the target coefficient, either approach is equally appropriate and preferable to uncorrected MLM.

scholarly journals Path Analysis for Binary Random Variables

2021 ◽  
pp. 004912412110312
Author(s):  
Martina Raggi ◽  
Elena Stanghellini ◽  
Marco Doretti
Keyword(s):  
Random Variables ◽  
Standard Errors ◽  
Marginal Effect ◽  
Direct And Indirect Effects ◽  
Direct Effects ◽  
P Values ◽  
Recursive System ◽  
Binary Random Variables ◽  
Log Odds ◽  
Research Questions

The decomposition of the overall effect of a treatment into direct and indirect effects is here investigated with reference to a recursive system of binary random variables. We show how, for the single mediator context, the marginal effect measured on the log odds scale can be written as the sum of the indirect and direct effects plus a residual term that vanishes under some specific conditions. We then extend our definitions to situations involving multiple mediators and address research questions concerning the decomposition of the total effect when some mediators on the pathway from the treatment to the outcome are marginalized over. Connections to the counterfactual definitions of the effects are also made. Data coming from an encouragement design on students’ attitude to visit museums in Florence, Italy, are reanalyzed. The estimates of the defined quantities are reported together with their standard errors to compute p values and form confidence intervals.

xtgeebcv: A command for bias-corrected sandwich variance estimation for GEE analyses of cluster randomized trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Gallis ◽  
Fan Li ◽  
Elizabeth L. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Variance Estimation ◽  
Public Health Education ◽  
Standard Errors ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Type I ◽  
Cluster Randomized Trials ◽  
Finite Sample ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Cluster Randomized

Cluster randomized trials, where clusters (for example, schools or clinics) are randomized to comparison arms but measurements are taken on individuals, are commonly used to evaluate interventions in public health, education, and the social sciences. Analysis is often conducted on individual-level outcomes, and such analysis methods must consider that outcomes for members of the same cluster tend to be more similar than outcomes for members of other clusters. A popular individual-level analysis technique is generalized estimating equations (GEE). However, it is common to randomize a small number of clusters (for example, 30 or fewer), and in this case, the GEE standard errors obtained from the sandwich variance estimator will be biased, leading to inflated type I errors. Some bias-corrected standard errors have been proposed and studied to account for this finite-sample bias, but none has yet been implemented in Stata. In this article, we describe several popular bias corrections to the robust sandwich variance. We then introduce our newly created command, xtgeebcv, which will allow Stata users to easily apply finite-sample corrections to standard errors obtained from GEE models. We then provide examples to demonstrate the use of xtgeebcv. Finally, we discuss suggestions about which finite-sample corrections to use in which situations and consider areas of future research that may improve xtgeebcv.

scholarly journals Relative Astrometry with Imaging Transit Telescopes

1995 ◽  
Vol 166 ◽  
pp. 9-12
Author(s):  
G. F. Benedict ◽  
J. T. McGraw ◽  
T. R. Hess
Keyword(s):  
Standard Errors ◽  
The Moon ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Existing Data

A CCD/Transit Instrument (CTI) has produced relative astrometry with standard errors less than 2.6% of a 1.55 arcsecond pixel for stars with V ≤ 17. Additional astrometric studies with existing data are required to better understand the ultimate contribution these devices can make to our science.The CTI is presently dismantled, awaiting a move to a new site. We briefly discuss the potential astrometric scientific returns from the exisiting data set, from a refurbished CTI, and from a similar device emplaced on the Moon.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document