Testing equality of correlation coefficients for paired binary data from multiple groups

Paired binary data arise naturally when paired body parts are investigated in clinical trials. One of the widely used models for dealing with this kind of data is the equal correlation coefficients model. Before using this model, it is necessary to test whether the correlation coefficients in each group are actually equal. In this paper, three test statistics (likelihood ratio test, Wald-type test, and Score test) are derived for this purpose. The simulation results show that the Score test statistic maintains type I error rate and has satisfactory power, and therefore is recommended among the three methods. The likelihood ratio test is over conservative in most cases, and the Wald-type statistic is not robust with respect to empirical type I error. Three real examples, including a multi-centre Phase II double-blind placebo randomized controlled trial, are given to illustrate the three proposed test statistics.     

A comparative study for robust canonical correlation methods

The aim of this study is to obtain robust canonical vectors and correlation coefficients based on the percentage bend correlation and winsorized correlation in the correlation matrix and fast consistent high breakdown (FCH), reweighted fast consistent high breakdown (RFCH), and reweighted multivariate normal (RMVN) estimators to estimate the covariance matrix and then compare these estimators with the existing estimators. In the correlation matrix of canonical correlation analysis (CCA), we present an approach that substitutes the percentage bend correlation and the winsorized correlation in place of the widely employed the Pearson correlation. Moreover, we employ the FCH, RFCH, and RMVN estimators to estimate the covariance matrix in the CCA. We conduct a simulation study and employ real data with the objective of comparing the performance of the different estimators for canonical vectors and correlation with that of our proposed approaches. The breakdown plots and independent tests are employed as differentiating criteria of the robustness and performance of the estimators. Based on our computational and real data studies, we propose suggestions and guidelines on the practical implications of our findings.     

An empirical study of eight tests of partial correlation coefficients

Partial correlations can be used to statistically control for the effects of unwanted variables.Perhaps the most frequently used test of a partial correlation is the parametric F test,which requires normality of the joint distribution of observations.The possibility that this assumption may not be met in practice suggests a need for procedures that do not require normality.Unfortunately,the statistical literature provides little guidance for choosing other tests when the normalityassumption is not satisfied.Several nonparametric tests of partial correlations are investigated using a computer simulation study.Recommendations are made for selecting certain tests under particular conditions     

A procedure for testing the equality of k dependent correlation coefficients

A procedure is proposed for testing the equality of k dependent correlation coefficients. The procedure is simulated utilizing Monte Carlo techniques; and, a method for post hoc probing is also suggested.     

A test for independence in a multivariate exponential distribution with equal correlation coefficients

A rank statistic is considered which may be used for testing for total independence in a p-variate exponential distribution with equal correlation coefficients. Critical values for the statistic are provided for p = 3.4 and sample sizes less than or equal to 20. Finally, the small sample power performance of the rank test relative to that of the locally most powerful similar lest under the exponential alternative is evaluated.     

Maximum likelihood estimation of the parameters of a multiple step-stress model from the Birnbaum-Saunders distribution under time-constraint: A comparative study

The cumulative exposure model (CEM) is a commonly used statistical model utilized to analyze data from a step-stress accelerated life testing which is a special class of accelerated life testing (ALT). In practice, researchers conduct ALT to: (1) determine the effects of extreme levels of stress factors (e.g., temperature) on the life distribution, and (2) to gain information on the parameters of the life distribution more rapidly than under normal operating (or environmental) conditions. In literature, researchers assume that the CEM is from well-known distributions, such as the Weibull family. This study, on the other hand, considers a p-step-stress model with q stress factors from the two-parameter Birnbaum-Saunders distribution when there is a time constraint on the duration of the experiment. In this comparison paper, we consider different frameworks to numerically compute the point estimation for the unknown parameters of the CEM using the maximum likelihood theory. Each framework implements at least one optimization method; therefore, numerical examples and extensive Monte Carlo simulations are considered to compare and numerically examine the performance of the considered estimation frameworks.     

Robustness and monotonicity properties of generalized correlation coefficients

A new class of generalized correlation coefficients that contains the Pearson and Kendall statistics as special cases was defined by Chinchilli et al. (2005) and applied to the estimation of correlations coefficients within the context of 2×2 cross-over designs for clinical trials. In this paper, we determine the infinitesimal robustness and local stability properties of these generalized correlation coefficients by deriving their corresponding influence functions. For cases in which the population distribution is a bivariate normal or a mixture of bivariate normal distributions we obtain explicit formulas, and establish monotonicity and sign-reverse rule properties of the generalized correlation coefficients.     

Test for the equality of several correlation coefficients

We derive two C(α) statistics and the likelihood-ratio statistic for testing the equality of several correlation coefficients, from k ≥ 2 independent random samples from bivariate normal populations. The asymptotic relationship of the C(α) tests, the likelihood-ratio test, and a statistic based on the normality assumption of Fisher's Z-transform of the sample correlation coefficient is established. A comparative performance study, in terms of size and power, is then conducted by Monte Carlo simulations. The likelihood-ratio statistic is often too liberal, and the statistic based on Fisher's Z-transform is conservative. The performance of the two C(α) statistics is identical. They maintain significance level well and have almost the same power as the other statistics when empirically calculated critical values of the same size are used. The C(α) statistic based on a noniterative estimate of the common correlation coefficient (based on Fisher's Z-transform) is recommended.     

On the structural estimation of certain correlation coefficients

In this paper, the estimation of a real-valued function of the parameter by minimizing the expected value of the quadratic loss function relative to the structural distribution of the parameter is proposed; this is called structural estimation. The general formulae developed have been used to obtain the structural estimate of the bivariate correlation coefficient and of the intraclass correlation coefficient.     

A comparative study of confidence intervals to assess biosimilarity from analytical data

Assessment of analytical similarity of tier 1 quality attributes is based on a set of hypotheses that tests the mean difference of reference and test products against a margin adjusted for standard deviation of the reference product. Thus, proper assessment of the biosimilarity hypothesis requires statistical tests that account for the uncertainty associated with the estimations of the mean differences and the standard deviation of the reference product. Recently, a linear reformulation of the biosimilarity hypothesis has been proposed, which facilitates development and implementation of statistical tests. These statistical tests account for the uncertainty in the estimation process of all the unknown parameters. In this paper, we survey methods for constructing confidence intervals for testing the linearized reformulation of the biosimilarity hypothesis and also compare the performance of the methods. We discuss test procedures using confidence intervals to make possible comparison among recently developed methods as well as other previously developed methods that have not been applied for demonstrating analytical similarity. A computer simulation study was conducted to compare the performance of the methods based on the ability to maintain the test size and power, as well as computational complexity. We demonstrate the methods using two example applications. At the end, we make recommendations concerning the use of the methods.     

Testing equality of correlation coefficients in two populations via permutation methods

The present paper investigates the asymptotic behaviour of a studentized permutation test for testing equality of (Pearson) correlation coefficients in two populations. It is shown that this test is asymptotically of exact level and has the same power for contiguous alternatives as the corresponding asymptotic test. As a by-product we specify the assumptions needed for the validity of the permutation test suggested in Sakaori (2002). A small simulation study compares the finite sample properties of the considered tests.     

A simple derivation of the distribution of the multiple correlation coefficient

It is shown that the non-null distribution of the multiple correlation coefficient may be derived rather easily if the correlated normal variables are defined in a convenient vay. The invariance of the correlation distribution to linear transformations of the variables makes the results generally applicable. The distribution is derived as the well-known mixture of null distributions, and some generalizations when the variables are not normally distributed are indicated.     

A comparative study on a permutation statistic

We studied asymptotic distribution and finite sample properties of a randomly weighted permutation statistic. The asymptotic normality and the finite sample simulations derived from our studies provided theoretical and numerical justifications for distributional assumption of many useful test statistics used in identifying spatial autocorrelations of mapped data. We compared a new method in computing the mean and the approximated variance of the randomly weighted D statistic, a special permutation statistic, with the Walter’s conditional method. In the numerical illustration of the method, we calculated the standardized values of the D statistic by subtracting the mean from the D statistic and dividing the difference by the standard deviation for the standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and the life expectancies among the 48 states of the continental USA. Spatial autocorrelations of the SMRs and the life expectancies were found to be statistically significant.     

Confidence intervals on intraclass correlation coefficients in a balanced two-factor random design

A modified large-sample (MLS) approach and a generalized confidence interval (GCI) approach are proposed for constructing confidence intervals for intraclass correlation coefficients. Two particular intraclass correlation coefficients are considered in a reliability study. Both subjects and raters are assumed to be random effects in a balanced two-factor design, which includes subject-by-rater interaction. Computer simulation is used to compare the coverage probabilities of the proposed MLS approach (GiTTCH) and GCI approaches with the Leiva and Graybill [1986. Confidence intervals for variance components in the balanced two-way model with interaction. Comm. Statist. Simulation Comput. 15, 301–322] method. The competing approaches are illustrated with data from a gauge repeatability and reproducibility study. The GiTTCH method maintains at least the stated confidence level for interrater reliability. For intrarater reliability, the coverage is accurate in several circumstances but can be liberal in some circumstances. The GCI approach provides reasonable coverage for lower confidence bounds on interrater reliability, but its corresponding upper bounds are too liberal. Regarding intrarater reliability, the GCI approach is not recommended because the lower bound coverage is liberal. Comparing the overall performance of the three methods across a wide array of scenarios, the proposed modified large-sample approach (GiTTCH) provides the most accurate coverage for both interrater and intrarater reliability.     

Statistical estimation and comparison of group-specific bivariate correlation coefficients in family-type clustered studies

Bivariate correlation coefficients (BCCs) are often calculated to gauge the relationship between two variables in medical research. In a family-type clustered design where multiple participants from same units/families are enrolled, BCCs can be defined and estimated at various hierarchical levels (subject level, family level and marginal BCC). Heterogeneity usually exists between subject groups and, as a result, subject level BCCs may differ between subject groups. In the framework of bivariate linear mixed effects modeling, we define and estimate BCCs at various hierarchical levels in a family-type clustered design, accommodating subject group heterogeneity. Simplified and modified asymptotic confidence intervals are constructed to the BCC differences and Wald type tests are conducted. A real-world family-type clustered study of Alzheimer disease (AD) is analyzed to estimate and compare BCCs among well-established AD biomarkers between mutation carriers and non-carriers in autosomal dominant AD asymptomatic individuals. Extensive simulation studies are conducted across a wide range of scenarios to evaluate the performance of the proposed estimators and the type-I error rate and power of the proposed statistical tests.Abbreviations: BCC: bivariate correlation coefficient; BLM: bivariate linear mixed effects model; CI: confidence interval; AD: Alzheimer’s disease; DIAN: The Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network; SA: simple asymptotic; MA: modified asymptoticKEYWORDS: Bivariate correlation coefficient, bivariate linear mixed effects model, parameter estimation, confidence interval, hypothesis testing, type-I error/size and power     

Fully efficient estimation of coefficients of correlation in the presence of imputed survey data

Marginal imputation, that consists of imputing items separately, generally leads to biased estimators of bivariate parameters such as finite population coefficients of correlation. To overcome this problem, two main approaches have been considered in the literature: the first consists of using customary imputation methods such as random hot‐deck imputation and adjusting for the bias at the estimation stage. This approach was studied in Skinner & Rao 2002 . In this paper, we extend the results of Skinner & Rao 2002 to the case of arbitrary sampling designs and three variants of random hot‐deck imputation. The second approach consists of using an imputation method, which preserves the relationship between variables. Shao & Wang 2002 proposed a joint random regression imputation procedure that succeeds in preserving the relationships between two study variables. One drawback of the Shao–Wang procedure is that it suffers from an additional variability (called the imputation variance) due to the random selection of residuals, resulting in potentially inefficient estimators. Following Chauvet, Deville, & Haziza 2011 , we propose a fully efficient version of the Shao–Wang procedure that preserves the relationship between two study variables, while virtually eliminating the imputation variance. Results of a simulation study support our findings. An application using data from the Workplace and Employees Survey is also presented. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 40: 124–149; 2012 © 2011 Statistical Society of Canada