The DOI matches its Crossref record.
On the bias of various estimators of the logit and its variance with application to quantal bioassay
Abstract
SUMMARY The bias of several logit estimators and their corresponding variance estimators is investigated in small samples. Their use in quantal bioassay is similarly explored. The logit transformation has been suggested in the analysis of higher dimensional contingency tables, by Woolf (1954) and many others more recently, and also in estimating the parameters of the logistic function in the quantal bioassay problem (Berkson, 1944, 1953). Various modifications of the logit have been suggested by Berkson (1953), Haldane (1955), Anscombe (1956), Tukey, mentioned by Anscombe (1956), and Hitchcock (1962). Modifications of its usual variance estimator have been proposed by Haldane, Goodman (1964) and Gart (1966). More recently Goodman, in an unpublished paper, has derived several further modifications of his estimator. In this paper we present a numerical comparison of the bias of these estimators and give conditions under which one or the other may be preferred. The use of logits in the quantal bioassay problem is briefly explored with particular reference to the asymptotic results of Hitchcock regarding the bias of the estimators.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models
Jaeger, T. F. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 · Cited by 3,317
“The idea behind such transformations is to stay as close as possible to the actual logit transformation while avoiding its negative and positive infinity values for proportions of 0 and 1, respectively (for an empirical comparison of different logit estimates, see Gart & Zweifel, 1967 ).”
BackgroundInfluentialWhat to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta‐analysis of sparse data
J. Sweeting, M., J. Sutton, A., & C. Lambert, P. (2004) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1761 · Cited by 1,734
A refined method for the meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials with binary outcome
Hartung, J., & Knapp, G. (2001) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1009 · Cited by 775
Assessing Evidence Inconsistency in Mixed Treatment Comparisons
Lu, G., & Ades, A. E. (2006) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214505000001302 · Cited by 756
Plackett, R. L. (1975) · Applied Statistics · doi:10.2307/2346567 · Cited by 731
Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests.
Hasselblad, V., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.167 · Cited by 579
The own-age bias in face recognition: a meta-analytic and theoretical review
Rhodes, M. G., & Anastasi, J. S. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0025750 · Cited by 346
Debray, T. P. A., Moons, K. G. M., & Riley, R. D. (2018) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1266 · Cited by 212
A randomized controlled pilot study of a brief web-based mindfulness training
Glück, T. M., & Maercker, A. (2011) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/1471-244x-11-175 · Cited by 168
Psychiatric Comorbidity of Adolescents with Sleep Terrors or Sleepwalking: A Case-Control Study
Gau, S.-F., & Suen Soong, W.-T. (1999) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/j.1440-1614.1999.00610.x · Cited by 139
Schwarzer, G., & Rücker, G. (2022) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_10 · Cited by 90
Yokoi, K., & Konomi, A. (2017) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114517001349 · Cited by 62
Metadata
- Authors
- GART, J. J., & ZWEIFEL, J. R.
- Venue
- Biometrika
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1967
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 181-187
- ISSN
- 0006-3444 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3510
- OpenAlex
- W2016699802
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
