Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Confidence Intervals01:21

Confidence Intervals

11.2K
An unbiased point estimate is often insufficient to predict a population estimate, such as population mean or population proportion. In this scenario, a confidence interval is used. A confidence interval is an estimate similar to a  sample proportion. However, unlike the point estimate which is a single value, the confidence interval  contains a range of values. These values have lower and upper limits, known as confidence limits, and can be designated as L1 and L2, respectively.
A...
11.2K
Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

594
Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
594
Interpretation of Confidence Intervals01:19

Interpretation of Confidence Intervals

10.5K
A confidence interval is a better estimate of the population than a point estimate, as it uses a range of values from a sample instead of a single value.
Confidence intervals have confidence coefficients that are crucial for their interpretation. The most common confidence coefficients are 0.90, 0.95, and 0.99, which can be written as percentages–90%, 95%, and 99%, respectively.
Suppose a person calculates a confidence interval with a confidence coefficient of 0.95. In that case, they can...
10.5K
Confidence Interval for Estimating Population Mean01:25

Confidence Interval for Estimating Population Mean

9.2K
A point estimate of the population mean is obtained from a single sample. Such a point estimate does not represent a population well because it needs to account for variability in the population. Single point estimate can also be biased despite the sample being selected randomly. Thus, a point estimate is often unreliable. A confidence interval is needed to reduce this unreliability.
A confidence interval for the mean is a range of values that provides an estimate of the population mean. As the...
9.2K
Estimating Population Mean with Unknown Standard Deviation01:22

Estimating Population Mean with Unknown Standard Deviation

9.1K
In practice, we rarely know the population standard deviation. In the past, when the sample size was large, this did not present a problem to statisticians. They used the sample standard deviation s as an estimate for σ and proceeded as before to calculate a confidence interval with close enough results. However, statisticians ran into problems when the sample size was small. A small sample size caused inaccuracies in the confidence interval.
William S. Gosset (1876–1937) of the...
9.1K
Confidence Coefficient01:24

Confidence Coefficient

11.0K
The confidence coefficient is also known as the confidence level or degree of confidence. It is the percent expression for the probability, 1-α, that the confidence interval contains the true population parameter assuming that the confidence interval is obtained after sufficient unbiased sampling; for example, if the CL = 90%, then in 90 out of 100 samples the interval estimate will enclose the true population parameter. Here α is the area under the curve, distributed equally under...
11.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A comparison of individual-level vs. hypothetically pooled mercury biomonitoring data from the Maternal Organics Monitoring Study (MOMS), Alaska, 1999-2012.

International journal of circumpolar health·2020
Same author

Serum elimination half-lives adjusted for ongoing exposure of tri-to hexabrominated diphenyl ethers: Determined in persons moving from North America to Australia.

Chemosphere·2020
Same author

Chemical analysis of snus products from the United States and northern Europe.

PloS one·2020
Same author

Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers and Biphenyl in Serum: Time Trend Study from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for Years 2005/06 through 2013/14.

Environmental science & technology·2019
Same author

LAMP: A CDC Program to Ensure the Quality of Blood-Lead Laboratory Measurements.

Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP·2018
Same author

Collaborative Method Performance Study of the Measurement of Nicotine, Its Metabolites, and Total Nicotine Equivalents in Human Urine.

Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology·2018

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 4, 2026

Visualizing Field Data Collection Procedures of Exposure and Biomarker Assessments for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial in India
09:33

Visualizing Field Data Collection Procedures of Exposure and Biomarker Assessments for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial in India

Published on: December 23, 2022

3.1K

Confidence interval estimation for pooled-sample biomonitoring from a complex survey design.

Samuel P Caudill1

  • 1Division of Laboratory Sciences, National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services, United States.

Environment International
|August 28, 2015
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed a multiple imputation method to accurately estimate persistent organic pollutant (POP) levels using pooled samples. This approach improves biomonitoring cost-efficiency and data completeness.

Keywords:
BiomonitoringComplex survey designDesign effectsPersistent organic pollutantsPooled-samples

More Related Videos

Methods of Soil Resampling to Monitor Changes in the Chemical Concentrations of Forest Soils
09:16

Methods of Soil Resampling to Monitor Changes in the Chemical Concentrations of Forest Soils

Published on: November 25, 2016

17.6K
Ecotoxicological Methodologies to Evaluate Biomarkers at Different Scales in Neotropical Anurans
08:14

Ecotoxicological Methodologies to Evaluate Biomarkers at Different Scales in Neotropical Anurans

Published on: April 28, 2023

934

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 4, 2026

Visualizing Field Data Collection Procedures of Exposure and Biomarker Assessments for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial in India
09:33

Visualizing Field Data Collection Procedures of Exposure and Biomarker Assessments for the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial in India

Published on: December 23, 2022

3.1K
Methods of Soil Resampling to Monitor Changes in the Chemical Concentrations of Forest Soils
09:16

Methods of Soil Resampling to Monitor Changes in the Chemical Concentrations of Forest Soils

Published on: November 25, 2016

17.6K
Ecotoxicological Methodologies to Evaluate Biomarkers at Different Scales in Neotropical Anurans
08:14

Ecotoxicological Methodologies to Evaluate Biomarkers at Different Scales in Neotropical Anurans

Published on: April 28, 2023

934

Area of Science:

  • Environmental Health
  • Biomonitoring
  • Statistical Methods

Background:

  • The National Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) historically characterized persistent organic pollutant (POP) concentrations using individual measurements.
  • Pooling samples reduces biomonitoring costs and left-censored results but complicates standard error and confidence interval (CI) estimation due to loss of direct design effect calculation.
  • Accurate statistical analysis is crucial for understanding population exposure to environmental contaminants.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To introduce and evaluate a multiple imputation (MI) method for calculating design effects in pooled-sample biomonitoring.
  • To enable accurate standard error and CI estimation for POP concentrations derived from pooled samples.
  • To compare the efficacy of pooled-sample estimates with traditional individual-sample estimates.

Main Methods:

  • A multiple imputation (MI) method was developed to calculate design effects for pooled-sample estimates.
  • Simulated National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) individual sample data were used to create artificial pools.
  • Geometric mean and percentile estimates with 95% CIs were calculated for two chemical compounds using NHANES 2005-2006 pooled samples and compared to NHANES 1999-2004 individual-sample data.

Main Results:

  • The proposed MI method allows for the calculation of design effects for pooled-sample estimates.
  • Simulations demonstrated the feasibility of comparing pooled-sample estimates with individual-sample estimates.
  • The study presents 95% CIs for POPs using pooled data, enabling robust statistical inference.

Conclusions:

  • The multiple imputation (MI) method provides a viable solution for accurate statistical analysis of pooled-sample biomonitoring data.
  • This method enhances the cost-effectiveness and data utility of large-scale biomonitoring programs like those conducted by the CDC.
  • The findings support the use of pooled samples for characterizing population exposure to persistent organic pollutants (POPs).