Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data

We compared aberration detection methods requiring historical data to those that require little background by using simulated data. Methods that require less historical data are as sensitive and specific as those that require 3–5 years of data. These simulations can determine which method produces a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hutwagner, Lori, Browne, Timothy, Seeman, G. Matthew, Fleischauer, Aaron T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005
Materias:
Dispatch
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320440/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15752454
http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1102.040587
_version_ 1782228831510200320
author Hutwagner, Lori
Browne, Timothy
Seeman, G. Matthew
Fleischauer, Aaron T.
author_facet Hutwagner, Lori
Browne, Timothy
Seeman, G. Matthew
Fleischauer, Aaron T.
author_sort Hutwagner, Lori
collection PubMed
description We compared aberration detection methods requiring historical data to those that require little background by using simulated data. Methods that require less historical data are as sensitive and specific as those that require 3–5 years of data. These simulations can determine which method produces appropriate sensitivity and specificity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3320440
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33204402012-04-20 Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data Hutwagner, Lori Browne, Timothy Seeman, G. Matthew Fleischauer, Aaron T. Emerg Infect Dis Dispatch We compared aberration detection methods requiring historical data to those that require little background by using simulated data. Methods that require less historical data are as sensitive and specific as those that require 3–5 years of data. These simulations can determine which method produces appropriate sensitivity and specificity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3320440/ /pubmed/15752454 http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1102.040587 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is a publication of the U.S. Government. This publication is in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from this work may be reprinted freely. Use of these materials should be properly cited.
spellingShingle Dispatch
Hutwagner, Lori
Browne, Timothy
Seeman, G. Matthew
Fleischauer, Aaron T.
Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title_full Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title_fullStr Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title_short Comparing Aberration Detection Methods with Simulated Data
title_sort comparing aberration detection methods with simulated data
topic Dispatch
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320440/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15752454
http://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid1102.040587
work_keys_str_mv AT hutwagnerlori comparingaberrationdetectionmethodswithsimulateddata
AT brownetimothy comparingaberrationdetectionmethodswithsimulateddata
AT seemangmatthew comparingaberrationdetectionmethodswithsimulateddata
AT fleischaueraaront comparingaberrationdetectionmethodswithsimulateddata

Ejemplares similares