Open Journal of Statistics
Vol.05 No.07(2015), Article ID:62404,10 pages
10.4236/ojs.2015.57078
A Note on Cochran Test for Homogeneity in Two Ways ANOVA and Meta-Analysis
Pamphile Mezui-Mbeng
CIREGED, Department of Economics, Omar Bongo University, Libreville, Gabon

Copyright © 2015 by author and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/



Received 24 August 2015; accepted 27 December 2015; published 30 December 2015
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we generalize the proof of the Cochran statistic in the case of an ANOVA two ways structure that asymptotically follows a Chi-2. While construction of homogeneity statistics test usually resorts to the determination of the covariance matrix and its inverse, the Moore-Penrose matrix, our approach, avoids this step. We also show that the Cochran statistic in ANOVA two ways is equivalent to conventional homogeneity statistics test. In particular, we show that it satisfies the invariance property. Finally, we conduct empirical verification from a meta-analysis that confirms our theoretical results.
Keywords:
Cochran Homogeneity Test, Chi-Square Distribution, Desimonian-Laird Test, Invariant, Two Ways ANOVA

1. Introduction
In ANOVA methodology, it is generally accepted that the error variance is unknown and is the subject of an estimate. However, in practice, these fundamental assumptions are rarely checked, forcing the use of Fisher statistic in the homogeneity test on the mean of the different groups ([1] -[5] ).
According to the work of [6] , the statistic test of homogeneity of two ways is of the form:
(1)
where
,
and
are respectively the mean and variance sample of the group (i, j) consisting of
observations;
, with
. In the foregoing expression, the number of groups is equal to KL, and Equation (1) is valid if
.
[7] tests the homogeneity of medical treatment between both groups of patients, using the [6] statistic in a meta-analysis (e.g. see [1] ). The above studies suggest that under the null hypothesis H0 of equality of the means of different groups (i, j), the Cochran statistic asymptotically follows a
. However, neither the work of [6] , nor those of [7] offer a formal proof of this result.
Despite the existence of some attempts proposed by [8] -[10] and [11] , in the literature, the construction of homogeneity statistical test on mean (or medians and percentiles) of various groups is generally based on a three-step methodology.
Step 1: The global average is estimated by a linear combination of the individual averages.
, where
represents respectively the mean and the non-negative weight of group
, and
.
Step 2: One assumes that the population variances of each group are unknown and estimated by the variances of the corresponding samples.
Let the vector q be given by:
where,
. We have:



The covariance matrix is then estimated by
Step 3: One constructs the statistics test
In explicit form,
where



In the case of one way ANOVA, [12] provides a faster method of building statistics homogeneity test, showing that this statistic is equivalent to Cochran. However, the authors offer no generalization of their result to the case of the two-factor ANOVA.
Following [12] , this paper proposes to generalize the construction of the statistical homogeneity test in ANOVA two ways settings. To our knowledge, this issue has not been discussed in the literature. Beyond the theoretical importance, in practice it induces many applications, particularly in medicine, to compare the effectiveness of two methods of administration of a molecule to two different populations.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the main results. Section 3 provides an empirical evaluation of the proposed test; and Section 4 concludes the paper.
2. Main Results
In this section, we first show that statistics



Proposition 1.

Proof.
We suppose that



Now let us consider




Let us consider
According to [13] , p.9, Theorem 1.7, the inverse of


where
Proposition 2.

Proof.
In practice, the variance




Based on Slutsky Theorem, the statistic T is asymptotically distributed as a

Proposition 3.
T and C are equivalent.
Proof.
Since,
and since,
We obtain:
Therefore, we get:
Also since,

So that,
Therefore we obtain the equivalence between T and C. And as it was demonstrated that T is asymptotically distributed as a
Defining G by

G verifies the following invariance property.
Theorem 1.
The G statistics is invariant by the choice of the weights and
Proof of Theorem 1.
To prove this theorem, we need the following lemmas.
Lemma 1.
According to [14] , p. 130, 7.11 (d) (ii),





Proof.
Straightforward. +
Lemma 2.
According to [14] p. 144, 7.73, if A and B are compatible matrices, then
Proof.
Straightforward. +
Lemma 3.
For Q in (4), its singular value decomposition is,


Proof.
It is easy to show that
where






Therefore,


Lemma 4.
We have
Proof.
According to Lemma 3,


+
From the above lemmas, we then can provide the proof of Theorem 1.
Proof of Theorem 1.
Therefore,





3. Application Meta-Analysis
In this Section, we empirically verify equality between both statistics G and C from a meta-analysis. The data come from the Stael program base. Specifically, we want to compare the effectiveness of three different molecules and, at the same time, we want to appreciate the impact of administration mode of different molecules (orally or intravenously). However, we don’t want to multiply experiments and number of subjects. In total, there are six possible combinations that means 6 series of measures (of different or identical subjects) on which is then measured a relevant quantitative parameter, sensible capture the influence of the decision of the molecules tested). The various combinations of two factors (molecules 3 and 2 modes of treatment) are the factorial design. Here the factor 1 has 3 modes: molecule A, B and C, while the factor 2 admits 2 modalities: Oral and injection.
Table 1 summarizes the distribution of the data used.
Table 2 and Table 3 report the main statistical characteristics of the both factors.
Table 4 gives the estimation of different parameters and that of the Cochran statistic.
Thus, from the definition of Cochran statistics C:

Table 1. Data.
Table 2. Statistics of factor 1.
Table 3. Statistics of factor 2.
Table 4. Estimation of main parameters.
Then we determine the G statistics as:
The Moore-Penrose decomposition





Finally, we have

The Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse matrix of

Therefore, the G statistics is calculated according to the formula,



Finally, we can verify the invariance property of G statistics, compared to



We then obtain
Returning to the procedure described in the previous Section, the following results were obtained,

And the corresponding Moore-Penrose matrix is
Once again, we can observe that
Interpretation
According to the above results, we observe that



4. Final Remarks
The literature generally uses a multi-step method for determining homogeneity statistics test. It is based on a linear combination of individual mean of the sample to estimate the overall mean. Like the G statistic in (6), this approach involves determining a covariance matrix and its Moore-Penrose inverse. However, we show that Theorem 1 generalizes the result of [12] in a two ways ANOVA and simplifies this process. We build a G statistic that is equivalent to C. In other words, the expression of C provides a simple formula for determining the statistic in the homogeneity test. Moreover, Theorem 1 shows that G is asymptotically distributed according to a

Cite this paper
PamphileMezui-Mbeng, (2015) A Note on Cochran Test for Homogeneity in Two Ways ANOVA and Meta-Analysis. Open Journal of Statistics,05,787-796. doi: 10.4236/ojs.2015.57078
References
- 1. Hartung, J., Makambi, K. and Argaç, D. (2001) An Extended ANOVA F Test with Applications to the Heterogeneity Problem in Meta-Analysis. Biometrical Journal, 43, 135-146.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1521-4036(200105)43:2<135::AID-BIMJ135>3.0.CO;2-H - 2. Hartung, J., Argaç, D. and Makambi, K. (2002) Small Sample Properties of Tests on Homogeneity in One-Way ANOVA and Meta-Analysis. Stat Pap, 43, 197-235.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00362-002-0097-8 - 3. Hartung, J., Knapp, G. and Sinha, B. (2008) Statistical Meta-Analysis with Applications. Vol. 738, Wiley, New York.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470386347 - 4. Asiribo, O. and Gurland, J. (1990) Coping with Variance Heterogeneity. Communications in Statistics—Theory and Methods, 19, 4029-4048.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03610929008830427 - 5. De Beuckelaer, A. (1996) A Closer Examination on Some Parametric Alternatives to the ANOVA F Test. Stat Pap, 37, 291-305.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02926110 - 6. Cochran, W. (1937) Problems Arising in the Analysis of a Series of Similar Experiments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 4, 102-118.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2984123 - 7. Der Simonian, R. and Laird, N. (1986) Meta-Analysis in Clinical Trials. Controlled Clinical Trials, 7, 177-188.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 - 8. Biggerstaff, B. and Jackson, D. (2008) The Exact Distribution of Cochran’s Heterogeneity Statistic in One-Way Random Effects Meta-Analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 27, 6093-6110.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.3428 - 9. James, G. (1951) The Comparison of Several Groups of Observations When the Ratios of the Population Variances Are Unknown. Biometrika, 38, 324-329.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/38.3-4.324 - 10. Kulinskaya, E., Morgenthaler, S. and Staudte, R. (2008) Meta-Analysis: A Guide to Calibrating and Combining Statistical Evidence. Vol. 757, Wiley, New York.
- 11. Welch, B. (1951) On the Comparison of Several Mean Values: An Alternative Approach. Biometrika, 38, 330-336.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biomet/38.3-4.330 - 12. Chen, Z., Ng, H.T. and Nadarajah, S. (2014) A Note on Cochran Test Homogeneity in One-Way ANOVA and Meta-Analysis. Stat Pap, 55, 301-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00362-012-0475-9
- 13. Schott, J. (1997) Matrix Analysis for Statistics. Wiley, New York.
- 14. Seber, G. (2008) A Matrix Handbook for Statisticians. Vol. 746, Wiley, New York.

































