Abstract
The typical way of judging about either the efficacy of a new treatment or, on the contrary, the damage of a pollutant agent is through a test of hypothesis having its ineffectiveness as null hypothesis. This is the typical operational field of Kolmogorov’s statistical framework where wastes of data (for instance non significant deaths in a polluted region) represent the main drawback. Instead, confidence intervals about treatment/pollution effectiveness are a way of exploiting all data, whatever their number is. We recently proposed a new statistical framework, called Algorithmic Inference, for overcoming crucial difficulties usually met when computing these intervals and abandoning general simplifying hypotheses such as errors’ Gaussian distribution. When effectiveness is expressed in terms of regression curves between observed data we come to a learning problem that we solve by identifying a region where the whole curve lies with a given confidence. The approach to inference we propose is very suitable for identifying these regions with great accuracy, even in the case of nonlinear regression models and/or a limited size of the observed sample, provided that a normally powered computing station is available. In the paper we discuss this new way of extracting functions from the experimental data and drawing conclusions about the treatments originating them. From an operational perspective, we give the general layout of the procedure for computing confidence regions as well as some applications on real data.
Keywords: confidence intervals, confidence regions, algorithmic inference, twisting argument, learning functions, linear regression, nonlinear regression
Current Pharmaceutical Design
Title: Appreciation of Medical Treatments Through Confidence Intervals
Volume: 13 Issue: 15
Author(s): B. Apolloni, S. Bassis, S. Gaito and D. Malchiodi
Affiliation:
Keywords: confidence intervals, confidence regions, algorithmic inference, twisting argument, learning functions, linear regression, nonlinear regression
Abstract: The typical way of judging about either the efficacy of a new treatment or, on the contrary, the damage of a pollutant agent is through a test of hypothesis having its ineffectiveness as null hypothesis. This is the typical operational field of Kolmogorov’s statistical framework where wastes of data (for instance non significant deaths in a polluted region) represent the main drawback. Instead, confidence intervals about treatment/pollution effectiveness are a way of exploiting all data, whatever their number is. We recently proposed a new statistical framework, called Algorithmic Inference, for overcoming crucial difficulties usually met when computing these intervals and abandoning general simplifying hypotheses such as errors’ Gaussian distribution. When effectiveness is expressed in terms of regression curves between observed data we come to a learning problem that we solve by identifying a region where the whole curve lies with a given confidence. The approach to inference we propose is very suitable for identifying these regions with great accuracy, even in the case of nonlinear regression models and/or a limited size of the observed sample, provided that a normally powered computing station is available. In the paper we discuss this new way of extracting functions from the experimental data and drawing conclusions about the treatments originating them. From an operational perspective, we give the general layout of the procedure for computing confidence regions as well as some applications on real data.
Export Options
About this article
Cite this article as:
Apolloni B., Bassis S., Gaito S. and Malchiodi D., Appreciation of Medical Treatments Through Confidence Intervals, Current Pharmaceutical Design 2007; 13 (15) . https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/138161207780765891
DOI https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/138161207780765891 |
Print ISSN 1381-6128 |
Publisher Name Bentham Science Publisher |
Online ISSN 1873-4286 |

- Author Guidelines
- Bentham Author Support Services (BASS)
- Graphical Abstracts
- Fabricating and Stating False Information
- Research Misconduct
- Post Publication Discussions and Corrections
- Publishing Ethics and Rectitude
- Increase Visibility of Your Article
- Archiving Policies
- Peer Review Workflow
- Order Your Article Before Print
- Promote Your Article
- Manuscript Transfer Facility
- Editorial Policies
- Allegations from Whistleblowers
- Announcements