Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

112
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...
112
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

220
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
220
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

1.5K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
1.5K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

349
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
349
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion01:24

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion

3.4K
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...
3.4K
Margin of Error01:27

Margin of Error

4.3K
The margin of error is also called the maximum error of an estimate. The margin of error is the maximum possible or expected difference between the observed sample parameter value and the actual population parameter value. For proportion, it is the maximum difference between the value of sample proportion obtained from the data and the true value of population proportion. As the true value of the population parameter is not known, the margin of error is calculated using the sample statistic.
4.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

"Back to the future" projections for COVID-19 surges.

PloS one·2024
Same author

Assessing, Testing and Estimating the Amount of Fine-Tuning by Means of Active Information.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2023
Same author

A Formal Framework for Knowledge Acquisition: Going beyond Machine Learning.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2023
Same author

Integrating microbial biomass, composition and function to discern the level of anthropogenic activity in a river ecosystem.

Environment international·2018
Same author

c-Jun-mediated microRNA-302d-3p induces RPE dedifferentiation by targeting p21<sup>Waf1/Cip1</sup>.

Cell death & disease·2018
Same author

High expression of synthesis of cytochrome c oxidase 2 and TP53-induced glycolysis and apoptosis regulator can predict poor prognosis in human lung adenocarcinoma.

Human pathology·2018
Same journal

A Causal Framework for Evaluating the Total Effect of Strategies Aiming to Expand Screening and to Improve Outcomes.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Causal Effects on Nonterminal Event Time With Application to Antibiotic Usage and Future Resistance.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Subgroup Analysis of Interval-censored Failure Time Data With Application to Alzheimer's Disease.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Rejoinder to Commentaries on "A Perspective on the Appropriate Implementation of ICH E9(R1) Addendum Strategies for Handling Intercurrent Events".

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

A Multi-Stage Drop-the-Loser Design With Superiority Boundaries.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same journal

Interpretable ROI Identification in Brain Image Analysis: Overcoming CNN Black Box Challenges With Kriging-Enhanced Adaptive Sampling.

Statistics in medicine·2026
See all related articles
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 Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 17, 2025

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

12.1K

Correcting prevalence estimation for biased sampling with testing errors.

Lili Zhou1, Daniel Andrés Díaz-Pachón1, Chen Zhao1

  • 1Division of Biostatistics, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, USA.

Statistics in Medicine
|September 1, 2023
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a new method for estimating infection prevalence, reducing bias from testing errors and oversampling symptomatic individuals. The approach provides more accurate infection prevalence estimates, especially valuable for public health surveillance.

Keywords:
COVID-19active informationbias correctionmaximum entropyprevalencesamplingsampling biastesting errors

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.5K
A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
12:18

A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment

Published on: January 11, 2020

7.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 17, 2025

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

12.1K
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.5K
A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
12:18

A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment

Published on: January 11, 2020

7.6K

Area of Science:

  • Epidemiology
  • Biostatistics
  • Infectious Disease Modeling

Background:

  • Prevalence estimation is crucial for understanding infection dynamics but is often biased.
  • Biases arise from oversampling symptomatic individuals and inaccuracies in diagnostic tests.
  • Naïve prevalence estimators can significantly deviate from true infection proportions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop a novel method for infection prevalence estimation.
  • To mitigate bias introduced by testing errors and symptomatic individual oversampling.
  • To account for stratified testing errors in symptomatic and asymptomatic populations.

Main Methods:

  • Development of a new statistical procedure for bias reduction in prevalence estimation.
  • Incorporation of stratified error rates for diagnostic tests.
  • Implementation of easily accessible algorithms with provided code.

Main Results:

  • The proposed method significantly reduces bias in prevalence estimation compared to existing approaches.
  • Bias is eliminated in certain scenarios by accounting for stratified testing errors.
  • Demonstrated effectiveness through formal results, simulations, and real-world COVID-19 data analysis.

Conclusions:

  • The new method offers improved accuracy for infection prevalence estimation.
  • It provides a robust tool for epidemiological surveillance and public health decision-making.
  • The approach is practical and validated on significant public health data.