Confidence interval individual

Figure 2.9. The confidence interval for an individual result CI( 3 ) and that of the regression line s CLj A are compared (schematic, left). The information can be combined as per Eq. (2.25), which yields curves B (and S, not shown). In the right panel curves A and B are depicted relative to the linear regression line. If e > 0 or d > 0, the probability of the point belonging to the population of the calibration measurements is smaller than alpha cf. Section 1.5.5. The distance e is the difference between a measurement y (error bars indicate 95% CL) and the appropriate tolerance limit B this is easy to calculate because the error is calculated using the calibration data set. The distance d is used for the same purpose, but the calculation is more difficult because both a CL(regression line) A and an estimate for the CL( y) have to be provided.

In general, this interval includes P 100% of all measured values, i.e., in the case of ft = 20 individual measurements, one value outside the confidence interval corresponds to the statistical expectation for P = 1 — a = 0.95. 

Fig. 4 Left the mean 1961-1990 monthly temperature for the Ebro catchment. Part (a) shows the annual cycle, each line representing a different RCM simulation and the bold line representing the CRU observed series. The shading represents the 95% confidence interval for the estimate of the observed 30-year sample mean. Part (b) represents the individual monthly model means as an anomaly from the CRU mean with 95% confidence interval superimposed. Part (c) represents the mean absolute annual error for each of the RCMs. Right-, as for left column but for mean precipitation (d) for the Gallego catchment. Model anomalies in parts (e) and (f) are expressed as a percentage relative to the CRU monthly mean. Model numbers correspond to experiments shown in Table 1. Figure from [35]...

For the four samples from a Polynesian island considered above, draw the 95 percent confidence region for the mean ft of lead isotope ratios and compare the results with the individual 95 percent confidence interval for the mean of each ratio. 

Begin by drawing and labelling the axes as shown. Draw a vertical line from 1 on the x axis. This is the line of no effect. The results of the individual trials are shown as boxes with the size of the box relating to the size of the trial and its position relating to the result of the trial. The lines are usually the 95% confidence intervals. The combined result is shown at the bottom of all the trials as a diamond, the size of which represents the combined numbers from all the trials. The result can be considered statistically significant if the confidence intervals of the combined result do not cross the line of no effect. 

For unknown distribution forms where only limited data is available it is possible to draw useful conclusions without knowledge of the distribution. For example, a confidence interval can be established for a set of analytical values by plotting cumulative percent of the number of analyses on the vertical axis against the individual analytical values on the horizontal axis. Then draw lines parallel to this plot at a distance of 100, the values for being read from a... 

First, amount error estimations in Wegscheider s work were the result of only the response uncertainty with no regression (confidence band) uncertainty about the spline. His spline function knots were found from the means of the individual values at each level. Hence the spline exactly followed the points and there was no lack of fit in this method. Confidence intervals around spline functions have not been calculated in the past but are currently being explored ( 5 ). 

It is well recognised that the faecal bile acid content of random stool samples is highly variable with marked daily variation.Therefore, studies testing the association between luminal bile acid exposure and the presence of colorectal neoplasia have usually measured serum bile acid levels, which demonstrate less variability and are believed to reflect the total bile acid pool more accurately. Serum DCA levels have been shown to be higher in individuals with a colorectal adenoma compared with individuals without a neoplasm. Only one study has assessed future risk of CRC in a prospective study of serum bile-acid levels. The study was hampered by the small sample size (46 CRC cases). There were no significant differences in the absolute concentrations of primary and secondary bile acids or DCA/CA ratio between cases and controls although there was a trend towards increased CRC risk for those with a DCA/ CA ratio in the top third of values (relative risk 3.9 [95% confidence interval 0.9-17.0 = 0.1]). It will be important to test the possible utility of the DCA/ CA ratio as a CRC risk biomarker in larger, adequately powered studies. A recent study has demonstrated increased levels of allo-DCA and allo-LCA metabolites in the stool of CRC patients compared with healthy controls. ... 

Confidence Intervals (or Bands). The 80% confidence interval about the true mean for each individual block is calculated. Since the kriging is done on the natural logarithm, the kriging standard deviation is multiplicative and the 80% confidence interval is approximately... 

In this figure, each individual confidence interval has been drawn as a vertical straight line joining the lower and upper limits. The horizontal line is positioned at the value 4.055 mmol/L- the population mean. This gives us 40 sample means that are not equal to one another, so they on their own like the original measurement show random... 

A test of the null h)rpothesis that the rates of infection are equal - Hq x jii/hnj = 1 gives a p-value of 0.894 using a chi-squared test. There is therefore no statistical evidence of a difference between the treatments and one is unable to reject the null hypothesis. However, the contrary statement is not true that therefore the treatments are the same. As Altman and Bland succinctly put it, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The individual estimated infection rates are jTi = 0.250 and = 0.231 that gives an estimated RR of 0.250/0.231 = 1.083 with an associated 95% confidence interval of 0.332-3.532. In other words, inoculation can potentially reduce the infection by a factor of three, or increase it by a factor of three with the implication that we are not justified in claiming that the treatments are equivalent. 

The Bayesian approach reverses the role of the sample and model the sample is fixed and unique, and the model itself is uncertain. This viewpoint corresponds more closely to the practical situation facing the individual researcher there is only 1 sample, and there are doubts either what model to use, or, for a specified model, what parameter values to assign. The model uncertainty is addressed by considering that the model parameters are distributed. In other words Bayesian interpretation of a confidence interval is that it indicates the level of belief warranted by the data the... 

For example 3.3, if we label the true SAE incidence rates in the population as a whole as Oj (assuming all patients in the population received trastuzumab) and 02 (assuming all patients were only observed), then we would be interested in confidence intervals for the individual rates 0 and 02 and also the difference in those rates 0 — 02. 

In Section 2.5.2 we set down the formulas for the standard errors for both individual rates and the difference between two rates. These lead naturally to expressions for the confidence intervals. 

There is a misunderstanding regarding a similar potential link between the p-value and the confidence intervals for the individual means. A significant p-value does not necessarily correspond to non-overlapping confidence intervals for the individual means. See Julious (2004) for further discussion on this issue. 

It is straightforward to obtain the estimated probability of surviving for various key time points from the Kaplan-Meier estimates. In the Packer et al. (2001) example, the estimated survival probability at 12 months in the carvedilol group was 0.886 compared to 0.815 in the placebo group, an absolute difference of 7.1 per cent in the survival rates. A standard error formula provided by Greenwood (1926) enables us to obtain confidence intervals for these individual survival rates and for their differences. 

If the treatment effect in each of the individual trials is the difference in the mean responses, then d represents the overall, adjusted mean difference. If the treatment effect in the individual trials is the log odds ratio, then d is the overall, adjusted log odds ratio and so on. In the case of overall estimates on the log scale we generally anti-log this final result to give us a measure back on the original scale, for example as an odds ratio. This is similar to the approach we saw in Section 4.4 when we looked at calculating a confidence interval for an odds ratio. 

Figure 8 Mean serum levels of salicylic acid, gentisic acid, and salicyluric acid of 10 volunteers. Total salicylate represents the sum of the three individual compounds. Error bars indicate 95% confidence interval of the mean. Source From Ref. 99.

Precision data can be documented in bar charts or control charts such as Shewhart control charts (see the discussion of internal quality control in Section 8.2.3.5). Bar charts plot %RSD values with their corresponding confidence interval. Control charts plot the individual measurement results and the means of sets of measurements with their confidence level (or with horizontal lines representing limits, see below) as a function of the measurement number and the run number, respectively [15,55,56, 58,72, 85]. 

If the estimates are strongly correlated then they are far from being independent and it is better to evaluate their joint confidence region instead of individual confidence intervals. As shown e.g., by Bard (ref. 4), the... 

The first step in the computation of the confidence interval is to form the 36 (=6X6) individual T/R ratios. This is illustrated in the following table, where the prechange lot slopes (R) are listed across the top of the table, the postchange lot slopes (T) are listed down the left margin of the table, and the individual T/R ratios are the entries in the body of the table ... 

In the third step, the 8th saA29th ordered individual ratios are the lower and upper limits, respectively, of the 90% confidence interval for the ratio of the median in vitro release rate (slope) for T over the median in vitro release rate for R. In the example, this confidence interval is 1.0343 to 1.2863, or in percentage terms, 103.43% to 128.63%. 

In analytical chemistry, the product is not spaghetti sauce, but, rather, raw data, treated data, and results. Raw data are individual values of a measured quantity, such as peak areas from a chromatogram or volumes from a buret. Treated data are concentrations or amounts found by applying a calibration procedure to the raw data. Results are what we ultimately report, such as the mean, standard deviation, and confidence interval, after applying statistics to treated data. 

---