跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦生物试验的二项趋势检验与历史信息合并,未讨论因果效应识别,故不强行归入因果推断。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
D. G. Hoel
T. Yanagawa

比例趋势检验中历史对照信息的纳入

研究问题
在啮齿动物致癌试验中,如何利用历史对照提高二项比例趋势检验的功效,尤其应如何处理罕见肿瘤与小概率响应?
方法与思路
作者用历史信息确定对照概率的 beta 先验,构造局部最强趋势检验,推导渐近分布并讨论精确条件检验。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要报告特定设计下的渐近效率增益,并称稀有响应时历史信息有助于提高功效,但渐近检验可能超过名义显著性水平。
阅读关注点
应核对历史与当前对照的可比性、beta 参数的确定方式、局部最强性的条件,以及精确检验和渐近检验的尺寸比较。
阅读边界
所给索引摘要未标稿件版本。效率和功效结论依赖所述设计与先验参数,摘要已提示小概率下渐近近似问题,不能普遍推广。

原文摘要

The testing of chemicals for carcinogenic activity in lifetime rodent bioassays has produced a large amount of data on a few strains of mice and rats. Because of the use of fixed protocols in repeated experiments, the opportunity presents itself for using this historical data in the analysis of a current experiment. What has been considered is the statistical incorporation of the historical control data into the current control group to increase the power of the test. This is especially relevant when dealing with tumors of a rare type where the toxicologist will place great significance on their occurrence in a treatment group. Experimentally it is assumed that three groups of about 50 animals each are tested at two treatment levels and a control. The response for each treatment group is assumed to be binomial. Further it is assumed that the probability of an animal with a tumor in the control group has a beta distribution that is determined from the historical control data. Several authors (Dempster, Selwyn, and Weeks 1983; Hoel 1983; Tarone 1982) have investigated the problem of testing for linear trend in proportions when historical information is available. In this article we give a locally most powerful test of trend for binomial response data by using a beta prior distribution for the historical control information. This generalized test is closely related to Tarone's statistic and generalizes the conditional test of Hoel. Under various conditions on the beta parameters (α, β), the asymptotic distribution of the test statistic is given under the null hypothesis H 0 of no trend in proportions and for a general sequence of alternative hypotheses that converge to H 0. Using these results, the asymptotic gain due to the incorporation of historical controls is given. For the usual bioassay design the asymptotic relative efficiency depends on α + β and is shown to be about 1.3 to 2.2, depending on the values of the beta parameters (higher efficiency for larger values of α + β). If the coefficient of variation for the beta-binomial is held constant, then large values of α + β correspond to small values of the mean of the beta-binomial distribution (i.e., rare tumors). The use of an exact conditional test is discussed, because for small beta-binomial means the approximations using asymptotic theory are somewhat unrealistic. Problems with the use of normality are illustrated numerically. Tables are given that compare the significance probability for selected outcomes for the exact and asymptotic tests. Also included are values for the Cochran—Armitage test, using no historical information. These tables show that the incorporation of the historical information greatly improves the power of the test for small means of the beta-binomial. The second observation is that the asymptotic test appears to exceed its nominal size. These observations were made using a mean of 1% for the beta-binomial. For large values of the mean, that is, 20%, the tests generally agreed. Thus the incorporation of historical data in general and the exact conditional test in particular is especially important where the spontaneous rates are small.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文