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

Truncation in Survival Analysis01:09

Truncation in Survival Analysis

207
Truncation in survival analysis refers to the exclusion of individuals or events from the dataset based on specific criteria related to the time of the event. This exclusion can happen in two primary forms: left truncation and right truncation.
Left truncation occurs when individuals who experienced the event of interest before a certain time are not included in the study. This is often due to a "delayed entry" into the study where only those who survive until a certain entry point are...
207
Prediction Intervals01:03

Prediction Intervals

2.3K
The interval estimate of any variable is known as the prediction interval. It helps decide if a point estimate is dependable.
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y. 
2.3K
Confidence Intervals01:21

Confidence Intervals

6.2K
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...
6.2K
Interpretation of Confidence Intervals01:19

Interpretation of Confidence Intervals

5.7K
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...
5.7K
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals00:54

Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals

4.1K
The confidence interval is the range of values around the mean that contains the true mean. It is expressed as a probability percentage. The interpretation of a 95% confidence interval, for instance, is that the statistician is 95% confident that the true mean falls within the interval. The upper and lower limits of this range are known as confidence limits. The confidence limits for the true mean are estimated from the sample's mean, the standard deviation, and the statistical factor...
4.1K
Confidence Coefficient01:24

Confidence Coefficient

7.6K
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...
7.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Blood plasma proteome analysis reveals biological mechanisms and potential biomarkers underlying feed efficiency in Texel sheep.

Tropical animal health and production·2026
Same author

Impact of Estimating Genetic Variance in the Target Group on Reliability Metrics of the Linear Regression Validation Method Under Selection.

Journal of animal breeding and genetics = Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie·2026
Same author

Genetic parameters via predictivity in large populations under strong genomic selection.

Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE·2026
Same author

Review: Genomic blueprint of cow longevity.

Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience·2026
Same author

Corrigendum to "Handling errors in the response: Considerations for leveraging unsupervised or incomplete data for genetic evaluations" (JDS Commun. 5:675-680).

JDS communications·2026
Same author

Genotyping errors can affect indirect predictions of young selection candidates: A simulation study.

JDS communications·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 1, 2025

Author Spotlight: Investigating the Role of Repetitive DNA Misregulation in Cancer Initiation and Immunotherapy Resistance
04:58

Author Spotlight: Investigating the Role of Repetitive DNA Misregulation in Cancer Initiation and Immunotherapy Resistance

Published on: December 13, 2024

2.4K

Confidence intervals for validation statistics with data truncation in genomic prediction.

Matias Bermann1, Andres Legarra2, Alejandra Alvarez Munera3

  • 1Department of Animal and Dairy Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA. mbermann@uga.edu.

Genetics, Selection, Evolution : GSE
|March 8, 2024
PubMed
Summary

This study introduces new analytical confidence intervals for genetic evaluation validation methods, predictivity and linear regression (LR). These methods provide accurate estimates of sampling variation without needing repeated calculations or bootstrapping.

More Related Videos

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.1K
Evaluation of Abnormal Growth-related Genes of Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells by Combining CRISPR/Cas9 Technology with Cell Counting
07:01

Evaluation of Abnormal Growth-related Genes of Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells by Combining CRISPR/Cas9 Technology with Cell Counting

Published on: May 2, 2025

122

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 1, 2025

Author Spotlight: Investigating the Role of Repetitive DNA Misregulation in Cancer Initiation and Immunotherapy Resistance
04:58

Author Spotlight: Investigating the Role of Repetitive DNA Misregulation in Cancer Initiation and Immunotherapy Resistance

Published on: December 13, 2024

2.4K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.1K
Evaluation of Abnormal Growth-related Genes of Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells by Combining CRISPR/Cas9 Technology with Cell Counting
07:01

Evaluation of Abnormal Growth-related Genes of Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells by Combining CRISPR/Cas9 Technology with Cell Counting

Published on: May 2, 2025

122

Area of Science:

  • Animal Breeding and Genetics
  • Quantitative Genetics
  • Statistical Genetics

Background:

  • Data truncation is common in genetic evaluations for predicting young candidate merit.
  • Predictivity and Linear Regression (LR) are key validation methods using partial datasets.
  • Current confidence intervals rely on computationally intensive replication or bootstrapping.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To derive analytical confidence intervals for predictivity and LR method statistics.
  • To develop approximations for large datasets.
  • To compare analytical and bootstrap confidence intervals.

Main Methods:

  • Derived standard errors and Wald confidence intervals for predictivity and LR statistics (bias, dispersion, accuracy ratio, reliability).
  • Developed approximations for large datasets using individual reliabilities.
  • Utilized Fisher transformation for accuracy ratio and predictivity confidence intervals.

Main Results:

  • Analytical confidence intervals were closer to simulated values than bootstrap intervals.
  • Bootstrap intervals were generally narrower than simulated intervals.
  • Approximated analytical confidence intervals showed similarity to bootstrap intervals.

Conclusions:

  • Analytical formulas enable estimation of sampling variation for predictivity and LR statistics without replication or bootstrapping.
  • The derived formulas are applicable to any dataset.
  • This offers a more efficient approach to assessing the reliability of genetic evaluation validation.