Table 2: Results of fitting a linear dose response using binary regression.

Dose masking scheme

ERR^{a} (per Gray)

Standard error

Deviance

LR statistic ( value)

Relative bias (%)

MSE

None

0.5235

0.1548

826.36

9.27 (0.0023)

—

0.0240

Rounded to three decimal digits

0.5237

0.1548

826.35

9.28 (0.0023)

0.038

0.0240

Rounded to two decimal digits

0.5235

0.1547

826.35

9.28 (0.0023)

0

0.0239

Rounded to nearest centiGray

0.5235

0.1548

826.36

9.27 (0.0023)

0

0.0240

Rounded to nearest deciGray

0.5228

0.1547

826.36

9.27 (0.0023)

0.13

0.0239

Stratified^{b}

0.5320

0.1553

826.11

9.52 (0.0020)

1.6

0.0242

Randomized^{c}

± 0.001

0.5235

0.1548

826.36

9.27

0.015

0.0240

(min, max)

(0.5234, 0.5238)

(0.1548, 0.1549)

(0.0023)

(0, 0.057)

(0.02397, 0.02398)

± 0.01

0.5239

0.155

826.36

9.28

0.16

0.0240

(min, max)

(0.5226, 0.5266)

(0.1548,0.1551)

(0.0023)

(0, 0.59)

(0.02396, 0.02407)

± 0.1

0.5271

0.155

826.33

9.31

1.6

0.0243

(min, max)

(0.5159, 0.5573)

(0.1537,0.1584)

(0.0023)

(1.4, 6.5)

(0.02415, 0.02557)

^{
a}ERR: excess relative risk (relative risk—1). Precision is overrepresented for comparison. ^{
b}Doses were stratified according to the categories used in Life Span Study Report 13 [27]. The dose value assigned to each individual was the mean of all database AHS stomach dose values in that group. ^{
c}A random uniform deviate between the specified range was added to the dose; if this operation resulted in a negative value, the masked dose was set to zero. Results are the averages from 500 simulations.