Evaluation of Statistical Treatments of Left-Censored Environmental Data Using Coincident Uncensored Data Sets. II. Group Comparisons

被引:84
作者
Antweiler, Ronald C. [1 ]
机构
[1] US Geol Survey, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
关键词
DETECTION LIMIT; VALUES; QUANTILES; ELEMENTS; SAMPLES;
D O I
10.1021/acs.est.5b02385
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The main classes of statistical treatments that have been used to determine if two groups of censored environmental data arise from the same distribution are substitution methods, maximum likelihood (MLE) techniques, and nonparametric methods. These treatments along with using all instrument-generated data (IN), even those less than the detection limit, were evaluated by examining 550 data sets in which the true values of the censored data were known, and therefore "true" probabilities could be calculated and used as a yardstick for comparison. It was found that technique "quality" was strongly dependent on the degree of censoring present in the groups. For low degrees of censoring (<25% in each group), the Generalized Wilcoxon (GW) technique and substitution of root 2/2 times the detection limit gave overall the best results. For moderate degrees of censoring, MLE worked best, but only if the distribution could be estimated to be normal or log-normal prior to its application; otherwise, GW was a suitable alternative. For higher degrees of censoring (each group >40% censoring), no technique provided reliable estimates of the true probability. Group size did not appear to influence the quality of the result, and no technique appeared to become better or worse than other techniques relative to group size. Finally, IN appeared to do very well relative to the other techniques regardless of censoring or group size.
引用
收藏
页码:13439 / 13446
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Evaluation of statistical treatments of left-censored environmental data using coincident uncensored data sets: I. Summary statistics [J].
Antweiler, Ronald C. ;
Taylor, Howard E. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 42 (10) :3732-3738
[2]   Handling of dioxin measurement data in the presence of non-detectable values: Overview of available methods and their application in the Seveso chloracne study [J].
Baccarelli, A ;
Pfeiffer, R ;
Consonni, D ;
Pesatori, AC ;
Bonzini, M ;
Patterson, DG ;
Bertazzi, PA ;
Landi, MT .
CHEMOSPHERE, 2005, 60 (07) :898-906
[3]   Identifying pollution source regions using multiply censored data [J].
Brankov, E ;
Rao, ST ;
Porter, PS .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 1999, 33 (13) :2273-2277
[4]  
Brinton T. I., 1996, 95426A US GEOL SURV, P16
[5]   Evaluation of censored data methods to allow statistical comparisons among very small samples with below detection limit observations [J].
Clarke, JU .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 1998, 32 (01) :177-183
[6]   Estimating contaminant loads in rivers: An application of adjusted maximum likelihood to type 1 censored data [J].
Cohn, TA .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2005, 41 (07) :1-13
[7]   LIMITS OF DETECTION [J].
CRESSIE, N .
CHEMOMETRICS AND INTELLIGENT LABORATORY SYSTEMS, 1994, 22 (02) :161-163
[8]   STATISTICAL-METHODS FOR ASTRONOMICAL DATA WITH UPPER LIMITS .1. UNIVARIATE DISTRIBUTIONS [J].
FEIGELSON, ED ;
NELSON, PI .
ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 1985, 293 (01) :192-206
[9]   Dealing with non-detect values in time-series measurements of radionuclide concentration in the marine environment [J].
Fievet, Bruno ;
Della Vedova, Claire .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY, 2010, 101 (01) :1-7
[10]   Nonparametric Rank Regression for Analyzing Water Quality Concentration Data with Multiple Detection Limits [J].
Fu, Liya ;
Wang, You-Gan .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 45 (04) :1481-1489