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

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion01:24

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion

4.1K
A complete procedure for testing a claim about a population proportion is provided here.
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
4.1K
Binomial Probability Distribution01:15

Binomial Probability Distribution

16.7K
A binomial distribution is a probability distribution for a procedure with a fixed number of trials, where each trial can have only two outcomes.
The outcomes of a binomial experiment fit a binomial probability distribution. A statistical experiment can be classified as a binomial experiment if the following conditions are met:
There are a fixed number of trials. Think of trials as repetitions of an experiment. The letter n denotes the number of trials.
There are only two possible outcomes,...
16.7K
Bonferroni Test01:10

Bonferroni Test

3.5K
The Bonferroni test is a statistical test named after Carlo Emilio Bonferroni, an Italian mathematician best known for Bonferroni inequalities. This statistical test is a type of multiple comparison test to determine which means are different than the rest. Bonferroni test can minimize the Type 1 error by reducing the significance level alpha, which otherwise increases with sample pairs.
The means of different samples are first paired in all possible combinations.
The null hypothesis of the...
3.5K
Introduction to Test of Independence01:21

Introduction to Test of Independence

3.1K
In statistics, the term independence means that one can directly obtain the probability of any event involving both variables by multiplying their individual probabilities. Tests of independence are chi-square tests involving the use of a contingency table of observed (data) values.
The test statistic for a test of independence is similar to that of a goodness-of-fit test:
3.1K
Test for Homogeneity01:23

Test for Homogeneity

2.6K
The goodness–of–fit test can be used to decide whether a population fits a given distribution, but it will not suffice to decide whether two populations follow the same unknown distribution. A different test, called the test for homogeneity, can be used to conclude whether two populations have the same distribution. To calculate the test statistic for a test for homogeneity, follow the same procedure as with the test of independence. The hypotheses for the test for homogeneity can...
2.6K
Hypothesis Test for Test of Independence01:16

Hypothesis Test for Test of Independence

8.4K
The test of independence is a chi-square-based test used to determine whether two variables or factors are independent or dependent. This hypothesis test is used to examine the independence of the variables. One can construct two qualitative survey questions or experiments based on the variables in a contingency table. The goal is to see if the two variables are unrelated (independent) or related (dependent). The null and alternative hypotheses for this test are:
H0: The two variables (factors)...
8.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Mediastinal lymph node dissection in older adults with radiologically pure-solid stage I lung cancer.

Surgical oncology·2026
Same author

Epidemiology and clinical course of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung: The Japanese lung cancer registry study.

Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)·2025
Same author

Chest Tube Drainage, Bone Radiotherapy, and Brain Radiotherapy in Advanced Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of Associated Factors and Survival.

Thoracic cancer·2025
Same author

Survival benefit and potential markers of chemotherapy for elderly and poor performance status patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results from the Japanese Joint Committee of lung cancer registry database.

Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)·2025
Same author

Predictors of nodal upstaging in clinical N1 nonsmall cell lung cancer.

Japanese journal of clinical oncology·2024
Same author

Surgically resected sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung: a nationwide retrospective study in 2010.

BMC cancer·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 4, 2026

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

3.1K

A Bayesian equivalency test for two independent binomial proportions.

Yohei Kawasaki1, Asanao Shimokawa2, Hiroshi Yamada1

  • 1a Department of Drug Evaluation and Informatics , School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Shizuoka , Suruga-ku , Shizuoka , Japan.

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics
|September 1, 2015
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a novel Bayesian index for assessing treatment equivalence in clinical trials. The new index offers a practical approach for demonstrating that two treatments are equivalent, addressing limitations in existing methods.

Keywords:
Bayesian inferenceequivalency testindependent binomial proportions

More Related Videos

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

11.6K
Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 4, 2026

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

3.1K
A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons
07:13

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

11.6K
Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.8K

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Clinical Trial Design
  • Bayesian Inference

Background:

  • Equivalence studies are crucial in clinical trials to demonstrate that two treatments yield similar outcomes.
  • Traditional superiority tests cannot directly assert equivalence, necessitating specialized equivalency tests.
  • Existing equivalency tests are primarily based on the frequentist framework, with limited options in the Bayesian framework.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose a new index for assessing the equivalence of binomial proportions within the Bayesian framework.
  • To introduce two distinct methods for calculating this novel Bayesian equivalence index.
  • To evaluate the performance of the two calculation methods and demonstrate the index's practical utility in real-world clinical trial data.

Main Methods:

  • Development of a new Bayesian index specifically designed for binomial proportion equivalence.
  • Implementation of two different computational approaches to calculate the proposed index.
  • Comparative analysis of the probabilities derived from the two calculation methods.
  • Application of the index to data from actual clinical trials.

Main Results:

  • The study successfully developed and validated a new Bayesian index for binomial proportion equivalence.
  • Comparison of the two proposed calculation methods revealed their consistency and reliability.
  • Demonstration of the index's practical applicability and interpretability through real clinical trial examples.

Conclusions:

  • The proposed Bayesian index provides a valuable tool for assessing treatment equivalence in clinical trials.
  • The developed methods offer a robust and practical approach for implementing Bayesian equivalence testing.
  • This work expands the availability of Bayesian statistical methods for clinical trial analysis.