A generalization of histogram type estimators

We introduce simple nonparametric density estimators that generalize theclassical histogram and frequency polygon. The new estimators are expressed as linear combination of density functions that are piecewisepolynomials, where the coefficients are optimally chosen in order to minimize the integrated square error of the estimator. We establish the asymptotic behaviour of the proposed estimators, and study theirperformance in a simulation study.

L'erreur en médecine ambulatoire: comment l'aborder. [Error in ambulatory medicine: how to deal with it?]

Medical errors compromise patient safety in ambulatory practice. These errors must be faced in a framework that reduces to a minimum their consequences for the patients. This approach relies on the implementation of a new culture without stigmatization and where errors are disclosed to the patients; this culture implies the build up of a system for reporting errors associated to an in-depth analysis of the system, looking for root causes and insufficient barriers with the aim to fix them. A useful education tool is the "critical situations" meeting during which physicians are encouraged to openly present adverse events and "near misses". Their analysis, with supportive attitude towards involved staff members, allows to reveal systems failures within the institution or the private practice.

An assessment of empirical Bayes and composite estimators for small areas

We compare a set of empirical Bayes and composite estimators of the population means of the districts (small areas) of a country, and show that the natural modelling strategy of searching for a well fitting empirical Bayes model and using it for estimation of the area-level means can be inefficient.

Using composite estimators to improve both domain and total area estimation

In this article we propose using small area estimators to improve the estimatesof both the small and large area parameters. When the objective is to estimateparameters at both levels accurately, optimality is achieved by a mixed sampledesign of fixed and proportional allocations. In the mixed sample design, oncea sample size has been determined, one fraction of it is distributedproportionally among the different small areas while the rest is evenlydistributed among them. We use Monte Carlo simulations to assess theperformance of the direct estimator and two composite covariant-freesmall area estimators, for different sample sizes and different sampledistributions. Performance is measured in terms of Mean Squared Errors(MSE) of both small and large area parameters. It is found that the adoptionof small area composite estimators open the possibility of 1) reducingsample size when precision is given, or 2) improving precision for a givensample size.

Improving small area estimation by combining surveys: new perspectives in regional statistics

A national survey designed for estimating a specific population quantity is sometimes used for estimation of this quantity also for a small area, such as a province. Budget constraints do not allow a greater sample size for the small area, and so other means of improving estimation have to be devised. We investigate such methods and assess them by a Monte Carlo study. We explore how a complementary survey can be exploited in small area estimation. We use the context of the Spanish Labour Force Survey (EPA) and the Barometer in Spain for our study.

An empirical evaluation of small area estimators

This paper investigates the comparative performance of five small areaestimators. We use Monte Carlo simulation in the context of boththeoretical and empirical populations. In addition to the direct andindirect estimators, we consider the optimal composite estimator withpopulation weights, and two composite estimators with estimatedweights: one that assumes homogeneity of within area variance andsquare bias, and another one that uses area specific estimates ofvariance and square bias. It is found that among the feasibleestimators, the best choice is the one that uses area specificestimates of variance and square bias.

Model selection and error estimation

We study model selection strategies based on penalized empirical loss minimization. We point out a tight relationship between error estimation and data-based complexity penalization: any good error estimate may be converted into a data-based penalty function and the performance of the estimate is governed by the quality of the error estimate. We consider several penalty functions, involving error estimates on independent test data, empirical {\sc vc} dimension, empirical {\sc vc} entropy, andmargin-based quantities. We also consider the maximal difference between the error on the first half of the training data and the second half, and the expected maximal discrepancy, a closely related capacity estimate that can be calculated by Monte Carlo integration. Maximal discrepancy penalty functions are appealing for pattern classification problems, since their computation is equivalent to empirical risk minimization over the training data with some labels flipped.

Fixed and random effects in Classical and Bayesian regression

This paper proposes a common and tractable framework for analyzingdifferent definitions of fixed and random effects in a contant-slopevariable-intercept model. It is shown that, regardless of whethereffects (i) are treated as parameters or as an error term, (ii) areestimated in different stages of a hierarchical model, or whether (iii)correlation between effects and regressors is allowed, when the sameinformation on effects is introduced into all estimation methods, theresulting slope estimator is also the same across methods. If differentmethods produce different results, it is ultimately because differentinformation is being used for each methods.

Random measurement error and regression dilution bias.

Summary points: - The bias introduced by random measurement error will be different depending on whether the error is in an exposure variable (risk factor) or outcome variable (disease) - Random measurement error in an exposure variable will bias the estimates of regression slope coefficients towards the null - Random measurement error in an outcome variable will instead increase the standard error of the estimates and widen the corresponding confidence intervals, making results less likely to be statistically significant - Increasing sample size will help minimise the impact of measurement error in an outcome variable but will only make estimates more precisely wrong when the error is in an exposure variable

The effects of dominance, regular inbreeding and sampling design on Q(ST), an estimator of population differentiation for quantitative traits.

To test whether quantitative traits are under directional or homogenizing selection, it is common practice to compare population differentiation estimates at molecular markers (F(ST)) and quantitative traits (Q(ST)). If the trait is neutral and its determinism is additive, then theory predicts that Q(ST) = F(ST), while Q(ST) > F(ST) is predicted under directional selection for different local optima, and Q(ST) < F(ST) is predicted under homogenizing selection. However, nonadditive effects can alter these predictions. Here, we investigate the influence of dominance on the relation between Q(ST) and F(ST) for neutral traits. Using analytical results and computer simulations, we show that dominance generally deflates Q(ST) relative to F(ST). Under inbreeding, the effect of dominance vanishes, and we show that for selfing species, a better estimate of Q(ST) is obtained from selfed families than from half-sib families. We also compare several sampling designs and find that it is always best to sample many populations (>20) with few families (five) rather than few populations with many families. Provided that estimates of Q(ST) are derived from individuals originating from many populations, we conclude that the pattern Q(ST) > F(ST), and hence the inference of directional selection for different local optima, is robust to the effect of nonadditive gene actions.

Biases of the ordinary least squares and instrumental variables estimators of the intergenerational earnings elasticity : revisited in the light of panel data

The OLS estimator of the intergenerational earnings correlation is biased towards zero, while the instrumental variables estimator is biased upwards. The first of these results arises because of measurement error, while the latter rests on the presumption that the education of the parent family is an invalid instrument. We propose a panel data framework for quantifying the asymptotic biases of these estimators, as well as a mis-specification test for the IV estimator. [Author]