Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Critical appraisal of two Box-Cox formulae for their utility in determining reference intervals by realistic
Kiyoshi Ichihara1, Teppei Yamashita2, Hiromi Kataoka3
1Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Minami-Kogushi 1-1-1, Ube, 755-0001, Japan.
Background:
The reference interval (RI) is defined as the central 95 % range of reference values (RVs) from healthy individuals. The ideal method for determining RIs is to transform RV distribution into Gaussian and estimate its 95 % range parametrically. One-parameter Box-Cox formula (1pBC) is widely used for correcting skewness (Sk) or kurtosis (Kt) in data distribution. However, 1pBC is not popular for computing RIs due to its unreliability in Gaussian transformation. While its two-parameter version (2pBC) is not used due to a challenge in fitting power (λ) and shift (α) parameters simultaneously. In this study, technical issues in fitting both formulae are assessed, and an alternative algorithm for successful use of 2pBC is proposed.
Methods:
For fitting 1pBC, optimal λ was determined by stepwise linear search. For 2pBC, optimal [λ, α] combination was pursued in two ways: by grid search of λ and α (2pBCgrid) or by using the grid search but keeping α-range close to the reference distribution (2pBCopt). Their accuracy and precision in determining RIs were compared by generating power-normal distributions simulating RVs of 23 major chemistry analytes. Additionally, their practical utilities were compared by analyzing 776 real-world datasets comprising test results of 25 analytes that were obtained from the global multicenter RV study of IFCC. For comparison, the performance of nonparametric method was evaluated in both settings.
Results:
For analytes with not-much-skewed distributions, unbiased estimation of RIs was accomplished by all methods. Nevertheless, when reference distributions are located far from zero, λ estimated by1pBC and 2pBCgrid fluctuated widely, which was attributable to virtually flat goodness-of-fit profile for [λ, α]. For highly skewed distributions, 1pBC caused bias in estimating RI and λ due to remotely peaked goodness-of-fit profile. Real-world data analyses revealed that 2pBCopt and 1pBC achieved Gaussian transformation (|Sk|<0.1 and |Kt|<0.3) in 82.4 % and 66.9 % among 776 datasets, respectively. Fitting bias signified by Kt<-0.4 was more common to 1pBC. The practical utility of 2pBCopt was unbiased prediction of analyte-specific distribution-shape (λ). Whereas nonparametric method gave highly variable RIs for both simulated and real-world datasets.
Conclusions:
2pBCopt is suitable for calculating RIs and grasping distribution-shape from the estimated λ.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Modified Boxplots
However, the box plot does not tell the reader about outliers - values that lie far from the center of the data. We can modify the standard box and whisker plot to identify the outliers and visualize the actual spread of the data in a sample.
Initially, we calculate the adjusted...
Finding Critical Values for Chi-Square
Interpretation of Confidence Intervals
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...
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Individual and Population Analysis
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...

