Table 6 |
|||||
|
Cost comparison Expected number of undetected regions included in the true cluster E(s* - S), expected number of detected regions not in the true cluster E(L - S) and the ratio of costs C/C2 (r = 1, 2) incurred by incomplete identification of the true cluster. The spatial scan statistic with low values is better. |
|||||
| Hot-spot Cluster |
Scan statistic |
E(s* - S) |
E(L - S) |
the ratio C/C2 |
|
|
|
|||||
| r = 1 |
r = 2 |
||||
|
|
|||||
| A = {14, 15, 20} |
Flexible (K = 15) |
0.108 |
2.951 |
3.059 |
3.167 |
| Circular (K = 15) |
0.065 |
0.722 |
0.787 |
0.852 |
|
| B = {14, 15, 20, 26} |
Flexible (K = 15) |
0.097 |
2.548 |
2.645 |
2.742 |
| Circular (K = 15) |
0.735 |
2.525 |
3.260 |
3.995 |
|
| C = {14, 15, 26, 27} |
Flexible (K = 15) |
0.492 |
2.243 |
2.735 |
3.227 |
| Circular (K = 15) |
1.736 |
3.153 |
4.889 |
6.625 |
|
| D = {73, 74, 75, 76, 78} |
Flexible (K = 15) |
1.774 |
1.088 |
2.862 |
4.636 |
| Circular (K = 15) |
2.770 |
1.709 |
4.479 |
7.249 |
|
|
|
|||||
|
Tango and Takahashi International Journal of Health Geographics 2005 4:11 doi:10.1186/1476-072X-4-11 |
|||||
