Stepwise Confidence Intervals without Multiplicity Adjustment for Dose—Response and Toxicity Studies
- 1 June 1999
- journal article
- theory and-method
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of the American Statistical Association
- Vol. 94 (446) , 468-482
- https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1999.10474141
Abstract
Not all simultaneous inferences need multiplicity adjustment. If the sequence of individual inferences is predefined, and failure to achieve the desired inference at any step renders subsequent inferences unnecessary, then multiplicity adjustment is not needed. This can be justified using the closed testing principle to test appropriate hypotheses that are nested in sequence, starting with the most restrictive one. But what hypotheses are appropriate may not be obvious in some problems. We give a fundamentally different, confidence set–based justification by partitioning the parameter space naturally and using the principle that exactly one member of the partition contains the true parameter. In dose–response studies designed to show superiority of treatments over a placebo (negative control) or a drug known to be efficacious (active control), the confidence set approach generates methods with meaningful guarantee against incorrect decision, whereas previous applications of the closed testing approach have not always done so. Application of the confidence set approach to toxicity studies designed to show equivalence of treated groups with a placebo is also given.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Statistical Proof of Safety in Toxicological StudiesDrug Information Journal, 1997
- Bioequivalence trials, intersection-union tests and equivalence confidence setsStatistical Science, 1996
- An Alternative Approach to the Analysis of Animal Carcinogenicity StudiesRegulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 1996
- Dose response studies II. analysis and interpretationJournal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 1995
- Bovine Growth Hormone: Human Food Safety EvaluationScience, 1990
- Contrasts for Identifying the Minimum Effective DoseJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1989
- Step Down Procedures for Comparison With a ControlAustralian Journal of Statistics, 1987
- On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of varianceBiometrika, 1976
- Some selection rules for comparing p processes with a standardCommunications in Statistics, 1975
- A Multiple Comparison Procedure for Comparing Several Treatments with a ControlJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1955