Sample size determination for the non-randomised triangular model for sensitive questions in a survey

Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 159-173

  Tian, Guo Liang ^a,b   Tang, Man Lai ^c   Liu, Zhenqiu ^b   Tan, Ming ^d   Tang, Nian Sheng ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND GREENEBAUM CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e YUNNAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDUCED ABORTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NON RANDOMIZED TRIANGULAR MODEL; POWER ANALYSIS; PROBABILITY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL MODEL; TAIWAN;

ABORTION, INDUCED; ADULT; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PREGNANCY; PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SAMPLE SIZE; TAIWAN; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80051866858     PISSN: 09622802     EISSN: 14770334     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0962280208099444     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Goodstadt MS, Gruson V. The randomized response technique: a test on drug use. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1975; 70: 814-18.
2. Warner SL. Randomized response: a survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1965; 60: 63-9.
3. Horvitz DG, Shah BV, Simmons WR. The unrelated question randomized response model. In Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section. American Statistical Association, 1967: 65-72.
4. Greenberg BG, Abul-Ela AA, Simmons WR, Horvitz DG. The unrelated question randomized response model: Theoretical framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1969; 64: 520-39.
5. Moors JJA. Optimization of the unrelated question randomized response model. Journal of American Statistical Association 1971; 66: 627-29.
6. Dowling TA, Shachtman RH. On the relative efficiency of randomized response models. Journal of American Statistical Association 1975; 70: 84-7.
7. Folsom RE, Greenberg BG, Horvitz DG, Abernathy JR. The two alternate questions randomized response model for human surveys. Journal of American Statistical Association 1973; 68: 525-30.
8. Boruch RF. Relations among statistical methods for assuring confidentiality of data. Social Science Research 1972; 1: 403-14.
9. Warner SL. The linear randomized response model. Journal of American Statistical Association 1971; 66: 884-88.
10. Liu PT, Chow LP. The efficiency of the multiple trial randomized response technique. Biometrics 1976; 32: 607-18.
11. Greenberg BG, Horvitz DG, Abernathy JR. Comparison of randomized response designs. In Prochan F, Serfling RJ, eds. Reliability and Biometry: Statistical Analysis of Life Length. SIAM, Philadelphia; 1974: 787-815.
12. Tracy DS, Mangat NS. Some development in randomized response sampling during the last decade - a follow up of review by Chaudhuri and Mukerjee. Journal of Applied Science 1996; 4: 147-19.
13. Yu JW, Tian GL, Tang ML. Two new models for survey sampling with sensitive characteristic: design and analysis. Metrika 2008; 67: 251-63.
14. Tian GL, Yu JW, Tang ML, Geng Z. A new non-randomized model for analyzing sensitive questions with binary outcomes. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26: 4238-52. (Pubitemid 47422836)
15. Tian GL, Yuen KC, Tang ML, Tan M. Bayesian non-randomized response models for surveys with sensitive questions. Statistics and Its Interface 2008, (in press).
16. Chow SC, Shao J, Wang HS. Sample Size Calculations in Clinical Research. CRC, Boca Raton; 2003.
17. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, (3rd edn). Wiley, New York; 2003.
18. Winkler RL, Franklin LA. Warner's randomized response model: a Bayesian approach. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1979; 74: 207-14.