Comparing the part with the whole: Should overlap be ignored in public health measures?

Journal of Public Health

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 278-282

  Hayes, Lillian J ^a   Berry, Geoffrey ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Confidence intervals; Health status indicators; Part compared with whole; Statistical methods

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CALCULATION; CANCER INCIDENCE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MORTALITY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; NEW SOUTH WALES; STATISTICS; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 33748799951     PISSN: 17413842     EISSN: 17413850     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdl038     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 4th edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science 2002, 159-62.
2. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 4th edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science 2002, 662.
3. Statistical Reporting Module. The Cancer Council of New South Wales. http://www.statistics.cancercouncil.com.au (18 February 2004, date last accessed).
4. Dobson AJ, Kuulasmaa K, Eberle E et al. Confidence intervals for weighted sums of Poisson parameters. Stat Med 1991;10:457-62.
5. Fay MP, Feuer EJ. A semi-parametric estimate of extra-Poisson variation for vital rates. Stat Med 1997;16:2389-401.