Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Robust confidence intervals for Hodges–Lehmann median difference

Contents:

Author Info

  • Roger Newson

    ()
    (National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London)

Abstract

The cendif module is part of the somersd package, and calculates confidence intervals for the Hodges–Lehmann median difference between values of a variable in two subpopulations. The traditional Lehmann formula, unlike the formula used by cendif, assumes that the two subpopulation distributions are different only in location, and that the subpopulations are therefore equally variable. The cendif formula therefore contrasts with the Lehmann formula as the unequal-variance t-test contrasts with the equal-variance t-test. In a simulation study, designed to test cendif to destruction, the performance of cendif was compared to that of the Lehmann formula, using coverage probabilities and median confidence interval width ratios. The simulations involved sampling from pairs of Normal or Cauchy distributions, with subsample sizes ranging from 5 to 40, and between-subpopulation variability scale ratios ranging from 1 to 4. If the sample numbers were equal, then both methods gave coverage probabilities close to the advertized confidence level. However, if the sample numbers were unequal, then the Lehmann coverage probabilities were over-conservative if the smaller sample was from the less variable population, and over-liberal if the smaller sample was from the more variable population. The cendif coverage probability was usually closer to the advertized level, if the smaller sample was not very small. However, if the sample sizes were 5 and 40, and the two populations were equally variable, then the Lehmann coverage probability was close to its advertised level, while the cendif coverage probability was over-liberal. The cendif confidence interval, in its present form, is therefore robust both to non-Normality and to unequal variablity, but may be less robust to the possibility that the smaller sample size is very small. Possibilities for improvement are discussed.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://repec.org/usug2007/newson_ohp1.pdf
File Function: presentation slides
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Stata Users Group in its series United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2007 with number 01.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 14 Sep 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:boc:usug07:01

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.stata.com/meeting/13uk
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Roger Newson, 2006. "Confidence intervals for rank statistics: Percentile slopes, differences, and ratios," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 6(4), pages 497-520, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:boc:usug07:01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F Baum).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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