Abstract
SUMMARY Conditions for the validity of the Hoel-Walburg and Peto tests, which compare dose groups with respect to tumour prevalence, are replaced by a more general condition, representativeness. A large carcinogenicity experiment provided a unique opportunity to assess empirically if this condition holds. Though representativeness was generally violated, neither the Hoel-Walburg nor the Peto tests were seriously distorted. Analytic considerations suggest that such robustness can occur in many situations.
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
