Scinovex
articleTop 1% cited

Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods

Statistics in Medicine · 1998 · Vol. 17(8) · pp. 873–890
Robert G. Newcombe

Abstract

Several existing unconditional methods for setting confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions are evaluated. Computationally simpler methods are prone to a variety of aberrations and poor coverage properties. The closely interrelated methods of Mee and Miettinen and Nurminen perform well but require a computer program. Two new approaches which also avoid aberrations are developed and evaluated. A tail area profile likelihood based method produces the best coverage properties, but is difficult to calculate for large denominators. A method combining Wilson score intervals for the two proportions to be compared also performs well, and is readily implemented irrespective of sample size.

Advanced Statistical Methods and ModelsScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceConfidence intervalStatisticsBinomial (polynomial)Sample size determinationComputer scienceMathematicsEstimationMaximum likelihoodAlgorithm

MeSH terms

Evaluation Studies as TopicProbabilityConfidence IntervalsBinomial DistributionLikelihood FunctionsLinear Models
Citations
1,831
FWCI
15.36
field-weighted impact
References
24
Percentile
99%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
References
Parameter Orthogonality and Approximate Conditional Inference
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · 1987 · 1,376 citations
Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical Inference
Journal of the American Statistical Association · 1927 · 3,590 citations
Comparative analysis of two rates
Statistics in Medicine · 1985 · 1,095 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.