95% confidence interval, definition

For standard deviations, an analogous confidence interval CI(.9jr) can be derived via the F-test. In contrast to Cl(Xmean), ClCij ) is not symmetrical around the most probable value because by definition can only be positive. The concept is as follows an upper limit, on is sought that has the quality of a very precise measurement, that is, its uncertainty must be very small and therefore its number of degrees of freedom / must be very large. The same logic applies to the lower limit. s/ ... 

The minimum detectable level, or detection limit, is defined as that concentration of a particular element which produces an analytical signal equal to twice the square root of the background above the background. It is a statistically defined term, and is a measure of the lower limit of detection for any element in the analytical process. (This definition corresponds to the 95% confidence interval, which is adequate for most purposes, but higher levels, such as 99% can be defined by using a multiplier of three rather than two.) It will vary from element to element, from machine to machine, and from day to day. It should be calculated explicitly for every element each time an analysis is performed. 

As the interpretation of data in some cases is quite definite, while, in other eases, a wider range of assessments seems possible, the qualitative assessment seheme is complemented by providing a subjective confidenee interval for each indicator. This subjective confidence interval is the result of critical discussion among the authors with respect to the possible margins of error of the assessment made. 

What was missing in the previous section was a definition of what is meant by equivalence. Since it is imlikely that two treatments wiU have exactly the same effect we will need to consider how big a difference between the treatments would force us to choose one in preference to the other. In the t)q)hoid example there was a difference in rates of 1.9% and we may well believe that such a small difference would justify us in claiming that the treatment effects were the same. But had the difference been 5% would we still have thought them to be the same Or 10 There will be a difference, say S %, for which we are no longer prepared to accept the equivalence of the treatments. This is the so-called equivalence boimdary. If we want then to have a high degree of confidence that two treatments are equivalent it is logical to require that an appropriately chosen confidence interval (say 95%) for the treatment differences should have its extremes within the boundaries of equivalence. 

As seen in Figure 12.1, this confidence interval is completely contained between the equivalence margins —151/min to 151/min and all of the values for the treatment difference supported by the confidence interval are compatible with the definition of clinical equivalence we have established equivalence as defined. 

Step 2 is then to run the trial and compute the 95 per cent confidence interval for the difference, Pi — P2> in the mean reductions in diastolic blood pressure. In the above example suppose that this 95 per cent confidence interval turns out to be ( — 1.5 mmHg, 1.8 mmHg). As seen in Figure 12.2, all of the values within this interval are compatible with our definition of non-inferiority the non-inferiority of the test treatment has been established. In contrast, had the 95 per cent confidence interval been, say, (—2.3 mmHg,... 

Our considerations are valid only for error-free observations since with errors in A the inequalities (1.87) are not necessarily true. It is far from easy to extend this method to the real situation. In (ref. 19) the authors increased each observed A values by the half-length of the confidence intervals (for definition see Chapter 3), i.e., replaced (1.87) by inequalities... 

Figure 5.8 shows a useful way to present one-sided confidence intervals. The idea is to emphasize the fact that we have established a definite lower limit, but are making no comment concerning how great the value might be. The figure also shows a normal two-sided 95 per cent Cl for the same data it places limits both above and below the mean. 

The results were striking. When all the pediatric trials were pooled, the rate of definite or possible suicidality among children assigned to receive antidepressants was twice that in the placebo group. (The summary risk ratio was 2.19 95 percent confidence interval.) Although the FDA staff did not provide this information to the committee, according to my own calculations, such a dramatic result could be expected... 

Of 326 patients with a clinical diagnosis of definite TIA, only one patient (0.3% confidence interval [Cl], 95% 0.1-1.7) was subsequently found to have symptomatic non-vascular pathology, a small subdural hematoma. Of 79 patients with a clinical diagnosis of possible TIA, two patients (2.5% 95% Cl, 0.7-8.8) were subsequently diagnosed with symptomatic non-vascular pathology, a meningioma in both cases. 

Determination ofplasma, urine, or tissue concentrations ofvitamins and their metabolites. These methods depend on comparison of an individual or group with the population reference range, which is normally taken as the 95% confidence interval twice the standard deviation about the mean value. By definition, 5% of the normal healthy population win lie outside the 95% reference range. 

Randomised controlled trials with definitive results (confidence intervals that do not overlap the threshold of the clinically significant effect)... 

Fig. 23. Statistical definition of the limit of determination by the confidence interval in the analytical result98)...

The test results are evaluated using the Shooman plot. The discovery rate is plotted versus the total number of defects discovered (Fig. 5). A regression linear fit curve is calculated and plotted together with maximum and minimum fits which by definition have a confidence interval of 5%. From the Shooman reliability model (Fig. 5), the number of remaining defects can be estimated. This information is useful to forecast the number of test cycles that are still necessary and a possible release date. 

There is nothing definitive about the selected number of 20. Quite generally, the estimate of the imprecision improves the more observations that are available. Exact confidence limits for the standard deviation can be derived from the distribution. Estimates of the variance, SD, are distributed according to the distribution (tabulated in most statistics textbooks) (N-l)SDVa X(v-i)j where (N-1) is the degrees of freedom. Then the two-sided 95% confidence interval (Cl) (95% Cl) is derived from the relation ... 

There are a number of values of the treatment effect (delta or A) that could lead to rejection of the null hypothesis of no difference between the two means. For purposes of estimating a sample size the power of the study (that is, the probability that the null hypothesis of no difference is rejected given that the alternate hypothesis is true) is calculated for a specific value of A. in the case of a superiority trial, this specific value represents the minimally clinically relevant difference between groups that, if found to be plausible on the basis of the sample data through construction of a confidence interval, would be viewed as evidence of a definitive and clinically important treatment effect. 

By definition, the experimental unit is the smallest unit randomly allocated to a distinct level of a treatment factor. Note that if there is no randomization, there is no experimental unit and (in nearly all cases) no experiment. Although it is possible to perform experiments without randomization, it is difficult to do well, and risky unless the experimental system is very well understood (7). Randomization is important for several reasons. Randomization changes the sources of bias into sources of variation in general, a noisy assay is better than a biased assay. Further, randomization allows estimates of variation to represent variation in the population this in turn justifies statistical inference (standard errors, confidence intervals, etc.). A common practice in cell-culture bioassay is to rotate among a small collection of layouts rather than use random allocation. Whereas rotation among a collection of layouts is certainly better than a fixed layout, it is both possible and practical to use carefully structured randomization on a routine basis, particularly when using a robot. 

---