Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Mar 8.
Published in final edited form as: Stat Med. 2015 May 26;34(26):3381–3398. doi: 10.1002/sim.6532

Table VII.

Median log difference across configurations of bias, interval width, and RMSE of methods described in Section 1.4 versus MITSS, by interval estimates coverage for multivariate X (for all configurations with JSD < 0.3 with only overlapping units).

Method Type Percent Absolute bias Interval width RMSE
MITSS-PS A 58 0.27 0.11 0.27
B 7 0.38 −0.01 0.37
C 17 0.16 0.39 0.16
D 19 0.22 0.02 0.22
MITSS-15 A 72 0.0 0.0 0.0
B 3 0.01 0.11 0.01
C 2 −0.01 0.02 −0.01
D 23 0.0 0.03 0.0
M–N–m A 60 0.4 0.27 0.4
B 8 0.54 0.14 0.54
C 15 0.3 0.5 0.3
D 17 0.36 0.06 0.36
M–C–m A 59 0.4 0.27 0.4
B 8 0.54 0.14 0.54
C 15 0.3 0.5 0.3
D 17 0.36 0.06 0.36
DR A 68 0.54 1.36 0.54
B 10 1.54 2.11 1.55
C 6 −0.26 0.31 −0.26
D 16 0.01 0.23 −0.01
IPW1 A 68 4.83 3.92 4.83
B 12 3.86 2.89 3.86
C 7 1.97 4.70 2.21
D 13 1.63 3.09 1.71
FM A 60 0.49 0.43 0.49
B 8 0.76 0.32 0.76
C 15 0.41 0.55 0.41
D 17 0.30 0.05 0.30

Differences are displayed as alternative methods to MITSS.

The types are configurations for which 95% interval estimates has the following coverages characteristics: A, MITSS ≥ 0.9 and Method ≥ 0.9; B, MITSS < 0.9 and Method ≥ 0.9; C, MITSS ≥ 0.9 and Method < 0.9; D, MITSS < 0.9 and Method < 0.9.