Literature DB >> 35707814

Efficient estimators with categorical ranked set samples: estimation procedures for osteoporosis.

Armin Hatefi1, Amirhossein Alvandi1.   

Abstract

Ranked set sampling (RSS) design as a cost-effective sampling is a powerful tool in situations where measuring the variable of interest is costly and time-consuming; however, ranking information about sampling units can be obtained easily through inexpensive and easy to measure characteristics at little or no cost. In this paper, we study RSS data for analysis of an ordinal population. First, we compare the problem of non-representative extreme samples under RSS and commonly-used simple random sampling. Using RSS data with tie information, we propose non-parametric and maximum likelihood estimators for population parameters. Through extensive numerical studies, we investigate the effect of various factors including ranking ability, tie generating mechanisms, the number of categories and population setting on the performance of the estimators. Finally, we apply the proposed methods to the bone disorder data to estimate the proportions of patients with osteopenia and osteoporosis status.
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ordinal; categorical population; imperfect ranking; isotonic estimation; maximum likelihood; non-parametric estimation; ranked set sampling

Year:  2020        PMID: 35707814      PMCID: PMC9041723          DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2020.1841742

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Stat        ISSN: 0266-4763            Impact factor:   1.416


  15 in total

1.  An improved procedure for estimation of malignant breast cancer prevalence using partially rank ordered set samples with multiple concomitants.

Authors:  Armin Hatefi; Mohammad Jafari Jozani
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Ranked set sampling for efficient estimation of a population proportion.

Authors:  Haiying Chen; Elizabeth A Stasny; Douglas A Wolfe
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-11-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Quantile regression with nominated samples: An application to a bone mineral density study.

Authors:  Mohammad Jafari Jozani; Olawale F Ayilara; William D Leslie
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  How many women have osteoporosis now?

Authors:  L J Melton
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  [Gender difference in osteoporosis prevalence, awareness and treatment: based on the Korea national health and nutrition examination survey 2008~2011].

Authors:  Yunmi Kim; Jung Hwan Kim; Dong Sook Cho
Journal:  J Korean Acad Nurs       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 0.984

6.  Bone density and fracture risk in men.

Authors:  L J Melton; E J Atkinson; M K O'Connor; W M O'Fallon; B L Riggs
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W Browner; J Cauley; K Ensrud; H K Genant; L Palermo; J Scott; T M Vogt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-01-09       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Risk factors for spinal osteoporosis in men.

Authors:  E Seeman; L J Melton; W M O'Fallon; B L Riggs
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1983-12       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  Effects of weight and body mass index on bone mineral density in men and women: the Framingham study.

Authors:  D T Felson; Y Zhang; M T Hannan; J J Anderson
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Relationship between Weight, Body Mass Index and Bone Mineral Density of Lumbar Spine in Women.

Authors:  Sang Jun Kim; Won-Gyu Yang; Eun Cho; Eun-Cheol Park
Journal:  J Bone Metab       Date:  2012-11-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.