Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by PORTIER, C. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by PORTIER, C. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1986 Oxford University Press

research-article

Type 1 Error and Power of the Linear Trend Test in Proportions under the National Toxicology Program's Modified Pathology Protocol

CHRISTOPHER J. PORTIER

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park North Carolina 27709

Type 1 Error and Power of the Linear Trend Test in Proportions under the National Toxicology Program's Modified Pathology Protocol. PORTIER, C. J. (1986). Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 6,515–519. This paper investigates the relationship between the probability of detecting a statistically significant linear trend in the proportion of animals observed to have tumors for the modified pathology protocol currently being employed by The National Toxicology Program. We considered over 300 possible dose-response relationships and tested at 5% and 1% significance levels. The results indicate that a small loss in the probability of detecting a statistically significant result will occur when the modified protocol is used instead of the previous pathology protocol. This loss varies as a function of the design of the study in terms of dose and animal allocation and as a function of the steepness of the dose-response relationship. The absolute difference between the probability of a statistically significant result for the original pathology protocol and that for the modified pathology protocol never exceeded 0.03. This difference was always less than 8% of the probability of a statistically significant result for the original pathology protocol.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.