Maximum likelihood estimate, Randomizing device, Randomized response technique, Sensitive questions, Warner’s model,

In this article, we investigate procedures for comparing two independent Poisson variates that are observed over unequal sampling frames (i.e. time intervals, populations, areas or any combination thereof). We consider two statistics (with and without the logarithmic transformation) for testing the equality of two Poisson rates. Two methods for implementing these statistics are reviewed. They are (1) the sample-based method, and (2) the constrained maximum likelihood estimation (CMLE) method. We conduct an empirical study to evaluate the performance of different statistics and methods. Generally, we find that the CMLE method works satisfactorily only for the statistic without the logarithmic transformation (denoted as W(2)) while sample-based method performs better for the statistic using the logarithmic transformation (denoted as W(3)). It is noteworthy that both statistics perform well for moderate to large Poisson rates (e.g. > or =10). For small Poisson rates (e.g. <10), W(2) can be liberal (e.g. actual type I error rate/nominal level > or =1.2) while W(3) can be conservative (e.g. actual type I error rate/nominal level < or =0.8). The corresponding sample size formulae are provided and valid in the sense that the simulated powers associated with the approximate sample size formulae are generally close to the pre-chosen power level. We illustrate our methodologies with a real example from a breast cancer study.

No abstract

Confidence interval (CI) construction with respect to proportion/rate difference for paired binary data has become a standard procedure in many clinical trials and medical studies. When the sample size is small and incomplete data are present, asymptotic CIs may be dubious and exact CIs are not yet available. In this article, we propose exact and approximate unconditional test-based methods for constructing CI for proportion/rate difference in the presence of incomplete paired binary data. Approaches based on one- and two-sided Wald's tests will be considered. Unlike asymptotic CI estimators, exact unconditional CI estimators always guarantee their coverage probabilities at or above the pre-specified confidence level. Our empirical studies further show that (i) approximate unconditional CI estimators usually yield shorter expected confidence width (ECW) with their coverage probabilities being well controlled around the pre-specified confidence level; and (ii) the ECWs of the unconditional two-sided-test-based CI estimators are generally narrower than those of the unconditional one-sided-test-based CI estimators. Moreover, ECWs of asymptotic CIs may not necessarily be narrower than those of two-sided-based exact unconditional CIs. Two real examples will be used to illustrate our methodologies.

We propose a new non-randomized model for assessing the association of two sensitive questions with binary outcomes. Under the new model, respondents only need to answer a non-sensitive question instead of the original two sensitive questions. As a result, it can protect a respondent's privacy, avoid the usage of any randomizing device, and be applied to both the face-to-face interview and mail questionnaire. We derive the constrained maximum likelihood estimates of the cell probabilities and the odds ratio for two binary variables associated with the sensitive questions via the EM algorithm. The corresponding standard error estimates are then obtained by bootstrap approach. A likelihood ratio test and a chi-squared test are developed for testing association between the two binary variables. We discuss the loss of information due to the introduction of the non-sensitive question, and the design of the co-operative parameters. Simulations are performed to evaluate the empirical type I error rates and powers for the two tests. In addition, a simulation is conducted to study the relationship between the probability of obtaining valid estimates and the sample size for any given cell probability vector. A real data set from an AIDS study is used to illustrate the proposed methodologies.

We construct several explicit asymptotic two-sided confidence intervals (CIs) for the difference between two correlated proportions using the method of variance of estimates recovery (MOVER). The basic idea is to recover variance estimates required for the proportion difference from the confidence limits for single proportions. The CI estimators for a single proportion, which are incorporated with the MOVER, include the Agresti-Coull, the Wilson, and the Jeffreys CIs. Our simulation results show that the MOVER-type CIs based on the continuity corrected Phi coefficient and the Tango score CI perform satisfactory in small sample designs and spare data structures. We illustrate the proposed CIs with several real examples.

No abstract

Although the item count technique is useful in surveys with sensitive questions, privacy of those respondents who possess the sensitive characteristic of interest may not be well protected due to a defect in its original design. In this article, we propose two new survey designs (namely the Poisson item count technique and negative binomial item count technique) which replace several independent Bernoulli random variables required by the original item count technique with a single Poisson or negative binomial random variable, respectively. The proposed models not only provide closed form variance estimate and confidence interval within [0, 1] for the sensitive proportion, but also simplify the survey design of the original item count technique. Most importantly, the new designs do not leak respondents' privacy. Empirical results show that the proposed techniques perform satisfactorily in the sense that it yields accurate parameter estimate and confidence interval.