Table 1.
Sample size (n) | No. in the sample unimmunized (d) | Probability of detecting health areas with 80% coverage as adequate (a) | Probability of detecting health areas with 50% coverage as inadequate (b) | Provider risk (1–a) | Consumer risk (1–b) | Total classification error (1–a)+(1–b) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
8 | 0 | 0.17 | 1 | 0.83 | 0 | 0.83 |
1 | 0.50 | 0.96 | 0.50 | 0.04 | 0.54 | |
2 | 0.79 | 0.83 | 0.21 | 0.17 | 0.38* | |
3 | 0.94 | 0.64 | 0.06 | 0.36 | 0.42 | |
12 | 0 | 0.07 | 1.00 | 0.93 | 0.00 | 0.93 |
1 | 0.28 | 1.00 | 0.72 | 0.00 | 0.73 | |
2 | 0.56 | 0.98 | 0.44 | 0.02 | 0.48 | |
3 | 0.80 | 0.93 | 0.20 | 0.07 | 0.28 | |
4 | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.07 | 0.19 | 0.27* | |
5 | 0.98 | 0.61 | 0.02 | 0.39 | 0.41 | |
14 | 0 | 0.04 | 1 | 0.96 | 0 | 0.96 |
1 | 0.20 | 1 | 0.80 | 0 | 0.80 | |
2 | 0.45 | 0.99 | 0.55 | 0.01 | 0.56 | |
3 | 0.70 | 0.97 | 0.30 | 0.03 | 0.33 | |
4 | 0.87 | 0.91 | 0.13 | 0.09 | 0.22* | |
5 | 0.96 | 0.79 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.25 | |
19 | 0 | 0.01 | 1 | 0.99 | 0 | 0.99 |
1 | 0.08 | 1 | 0.92 | 0 | 0.92 | |
2 | 0.24 | 1 | 0.76 | 0 | 0.76 | |
3 | 0.46 | 1 | 0.54 | 0 | 0.55 | |
4 | 0.67 | 0.99 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.34 | |
5 | 0.84 | 0.97 | 0.16 | 0.03 | 0.20 | |
6 | 0.93 | 0.92 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.15* | |
7 | 0.98 | 0.82 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.20 | |
28 | 5 | 0.50 | 1 | 0.50 | 0 | 0.50 |
6 | 0.68 | 1 | 0.32 | 0 | 0.32 | |
7 | 0.81 | 0.99 | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.20 | |
8 | 0.91 | 0.98 | 0.09 | 0.02 | 0.11 | |
9 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.08* | |
10 | 0.99 | 0.90 | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.11 |
*Optimal decision rule for a sample size;
LQAS=Lot quality assurance sampling
Source: Grant EL, Leavenworth RS. 1988:391–425 (7)