Abstract
Recent years have seen a heightened interest in estimating effect size—a common measure of effect magnitude in biomedical research—because of its direct clinical relevance. In this article, three interval estimates of effect size for randomized comparative parallel-group studies with unequal variances are discussed. Two real-life examples illustrate that confidence intervals obtained by three methods are quite different, especially when the sample sizes are small. Simulation results show that confidence intervals generated by the modified signed log-likelihood ratio method yield essentially the exact coverage probabilities, whereas the other two methods, even though they are more popular methods, yield less satisfactory results.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
