Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
4
pubmed:dateCreated
2010-2-1
pubmed:abstractText
The Faecal Egg Count Reduction Test (FECRT) is the most widely used method of assessing the efficacy of anthelmintics, and is the only in vivo technique currently approved for use with horses. Equine Faecal Egg Count (FEC) data are frequently characterised by a low mean, high variability, small sample size and frequent zero count observations. Accurate analysis of the data therefore depends on the use of an appropriate statistical technique. Analyses of simulated FECRT data by methods based on calculation of the empirical mean and variance, non-parametric bootstrapping, and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) are compared. The MCMC method consistently outperformed the other methods, independently of the distribution from which the data were generated. Bootstrapping produced notional 95% confidence intervals containing the true parameter as little as 40% of the time with sample sizes of less than 50. Analysis of equine FECRT data yielded inconclusive results in 53 of 63 (84%) datasets, suggesting that the routine use of prior sample size calculations should be adopted to ensure sufficient data are collected. The authors conclude that computationally intensive parametric methods such as MCMC be used for analysis of FECRT data with sample sizes of less than 50, in order to avoid erroneous inference about the true efficacy of anthelmintics in the field.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
1873-1716
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Electronic
pubmed:day
1
pubmed:volume
93
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
316-23
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2010
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparison of three alternative methods for analysis of equine Faecal Egg Count Reduction Test data.
pubmed:affiliation
Boyd Orr Centre for Population and Ecosystem Health, Institute of Comparative Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. m.denwood@vet.gla.ac.uk
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study