Papers › Variance estimation for logistic regression in case-cohort studies
Variance estimation for logistic regression in case-cohort studies
Hisashi Noma
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The logistic regression analysis proposed by Schouten et al. (Stat Med. 1993;12:1733-1745) has been a standard method in current statistical analysis of case-cohort studies, and it enables effective estimation of risk ratio from selected subsamples. Schouten et al. (1993) also proposed the standard error estimate of the risk ratio estimator can be calculated by the robust variance estimator. In this article, however, we show that the robust variance estimator does not account for the duplications of case and subcohort samples and generally has certain bias, i.e., inaccurate confidence intervals and P-values are possibly obtained. To address the invalid statistical inference problem, we provide an alternative bootstrap-based valid variance estimator. Through simulation studies, the bootstrap method consistently provided more precise confidence intervals compared with those provided by the robust variance method, while retaining adequate coverage probabilities. The conventional robust variance estimator has certain bias, and inadequate conclusions might be deduced. The bootstrap method would be an alternative effective approach in practice to provide accurate evidence.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections