Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2016.23.2.093

An Overview of Bootstrapping Method Applicable to Survey Researches in Rehabilitation Science  

Choi, Bong-sam (Dept. of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Welfare, Woosong University)
Publication Information
Physical Therapy Korea / v.23, no.2, 2016 , pp. 93-99 More about this Journal
Abstract
Background: Parametric statistical procedures are typically conducted under the condition in which a sample distribution is statistically identical with its population. In reality, investigators use inferential statistics to estimate parameters based on the sample drawn because population distributions are unknown. The uncertainty of limited data from the sample such as lack of sample size may be a challenge in most rehabilitation studies. Objects: The purpose of this study is to review the bootstrapping method to overcome shortcomings of limited sample size in rehabilitation studies. Methods: Articles were reviewed. Results: Bootstrapping method is a statistical procedure that permits the iterative re-sampling with replacement from a sample when the population distribution is unknown. This statistical procedure is to enhance the representativeness of the population being studied and to determine estimates of the parameters when sample size are too limited to generalize the study outcome to target population. The bootstrapping method would overcome limitations such as type II error resulting from small sample sizes. An application on a typical data of a study represented how to deal with challenges of estimating a parameter from small sample size and enhance the uncertainty with optimal confidence intervals and levels. Conclusion: Bootstrapping method may be an effective statistical procedure reducing the standard error of population parameters under the condition requiring both acceptable confidence intervals and confidence level (i.e., p=.05).
Keywords
Bootstrap; Error; Measurement; Population; Sample size;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Anderson AJ, Vingrys AJ. Small samples: Does size matter? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42(7): 1411-1413.
2 Banerjee A, Chaudhury S. Statistics without tears: Populations and samples. Ind Psychiatry J. 2010; 19(1):60-65.   DOI
3 Banerjee A, Chitnis UB, Jadhav SL, et al. Hypothesis testing, type I and type II errors. Ind Psychiatry J. 2009;18(2):127-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.62274   DOI
4 Button KS, Ioannidis JP, Mokrysz C, et al. Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013; 14(5):365-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn3475   DOI
5 Choi BS, Park SY. Responsiveness comparisons of self-report versus therapist-scored functional capacity for workers with low back pain. Phys Ther Korea. 2012;19(3):91-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2012.19.3.091   DOI
6 Claudy JG. A comparison of five variable weighting procedures. Educ Psychol Meas. 1972;32:311-322.   DOI
7 Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, N.J, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 1988:112-122.
8 Efron B. Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat. 1979;7(1):1-26.   DOI
9 Efron B. Bayesian inference and the parametric bootstrap. Ann Appl Stat. 2012;6(4):1971-1997.   DOI
10 Efron B, Tibshirani R. An Introduction to the Bootstrap. 1st ed. London, Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1993:23-29.
11 Green SB. How many subjects it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behav Res. 1991;26(3): 499-510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7   DOI
12 Hall P. Theoretical comparison of bootstrap confidence intervals. Ann Stat. 1988;16(3):927-953.   DOI
13 Hall P. On bootstrap confidence intervals in nonparametric regression. Ann Stat. 1992;20(2):695-711.   DOI
14 Ioannidis JP, Tarone R, McLaughlin JK. The false-positive to false-negative ratio in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiology. 2011;22(4):450-456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31821b506e   DOI
15 Page P. Beyond statistical significance: Clinical interpretation of rehabilitation research literature. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014;9(5):726-736.
16 Ioannidis JP. Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology. 2008:19(5):640-648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31818131e7   DOI
17 Kulesa A, Krzywinski M, Blainey P, et al. Points of significance: Sampling distributions and the bootstrap. Nat Methods. 2015;12(6):477-478.   DOI
18 Masicampo EJ, Lalande DR. A peculiar prevalence of p values just below .05. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(11):2271-2279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.711335   DOI
19 Pedhazur EJ, Schmelkin LP. Measurement, Design and Analysis: An integrated approach. 1st ed. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 1991:89-97.
20 Pernet CR, Latinus M, Nicholas TE, et al. Cluster-based computational methods for mass univariate analyses of event-related brain potentials/fields: A simulation study. J Neurosci Methods. 2015;250:85-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.08.003   DOI
21 Singh K. On the asymptotic accuracy of Efron's bootstrap. Ann Stat. 1981;9(6):1187-1195.   DOI
22 Singh K, Xie M. Bootlier-plot: Bootstrap based outlier detection plot. Sankhya Ser A. 2003;65(3): 532-559.
23 Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 3rd ed. New York, Haper Collins Publishers, 1996:120-122.
24 Velozo CA, Choi B, Zylstra SE, et al. Measurement qualities of a self-report and therapist-scored functional capacity instrument based on the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(1):109-122.
25 Wyrwich KW. Minimal important difference thresholds and the standard error of measurement: Is there a connection? J Biopharm Stat. 2004;14(1): 97-110.   DOI
26 Wolf EJ, Harrington KM, Clark SL, et al. Sample size requirements for structural equation models: An evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educ Psychol Meas. 2013;76(6):913-934.