Thomas J. DiCiccio

This paper concerns the construction of confidence intervals in standard seroprevalence surveys. In particular, we discuss methods for constructing confidence intervals for the proportion of individuals in a population infected with a disease using a sample of antibody test results and measurements of the test's false positive and false negative rates. We begin by documenting erratic behavior in the coverage probabilities of standard Wald and percentile bootstrap intervals when applied to this problem. We then consider two alternative sets of intervals constructed with test inversion. The first set of intervals are approximate, using either asymptotic or bootstrap approximation to the finite-sample distribution of a chosen test statistic. We consider several choices of test statistic, including maximum likelihood estimators and generalized likelihood ratio statistics. We show with simulation that, at empirically relevant parameter values and sample sizes, the coverage probabilities for these intervals are close to their nominal level and are approximately equi-tailed. The second set of intervals are shown to contain the true parameter value with probability at least equal to the nominal level, but can be conservative in finite samples.

Bayesian properties of the signed root likelihood ratio statistic are analysed. Conditions for first-order probability matching are derived by the examination of the Bayesian posterior and frequentist means of this statistic. Second-order matching conditions are shown to arise from matching of the Bayesian posterior and frequentist variances of a mean-adjusted version of the signed root statistic. Conditions for conditional probability matching in ancillary statistic models are derived and discussed.

Objective Bayes methodology is considered for conditional frequentist inference about a canonical parameter in a multi-parameter exponential family. A condition is derived under which posterior Bayes quantiles match the conditional frequentist coverage to a higher-order approximation in terms of the sample size. This condition is on the model, not on the prior, and it ensures that any first-order probability matching prior in the unconditional sense automatically yields higher-order conditional probability matching. Objective Bayes methods are compared to parametric bootstrap and analytic methods for higher-order conditional frequentist inference.

Higher-order inference about a scalar parameter in the presence of nuisance parameters can be achieved by bootstrapping, in circumstances where the parameter of interest is a component of the canonical parameter in a full exponential family. The optimal test, which is approximated, is a conditional one based on conditioning on the sufficient statistic for the nuisance parameter. A bootstrap procedure that ignores the conditioning is shown to have desirable conditional properties in providing third-order relative accuracy in approximation of p-values associated with the optimal test, in both continuous and discrete models. The bootstrap approach is equivalent to third-order analytical approaches, and is demonstrated in a number of examples to give very accurate approximations even for very small sample sizes.

The authors propose two methods based on the signed root of the likelihood ratio statistic for one‐sided testing of a simple null hypothesis about a scalar parameter in the présence of nuisance parameters. Both methods are third‐order accurate and utilise simulation to avoid the need for onerous analytical calculations characteristic of competing saddlepoint procedures. Moreover, the new methods do not require specification of ancillary statistics. The methods respect the conditioning associated with similar tests up to an error of third order, and conditioning on ancillary statistics to an error of second order.