cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Browse apps to extend the software in the new JMP Marketplace
Choose Language Hide Translation Bar
faustoG
Level I

Individual Control Chart

here you find 54 individual data, exponentially distributed.

JMP analyses the data and provides a STRANGE Control Chart

Why?

See the attached file

Fausto Galetto

61 REPLIES 61
faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

@dlehman1 

@jthi 

In JMP Guide I found

  • In the T chart, all points appear to be within the control limits. It is clear that the Individual & Moving Range chart was inappropriate for the analysis, as the limits were too narrow.

In my JMP Student Edition at Rare Events I see

  1.  neither G Charts nor T charts
  2. the G chart requires integer values, while T chart doesn't

faustoG

 

jthi
Super User

Re: Individual Control Chart

To my knowledge, JMP Student Edition should be exactly the same as JMP Pro (except for different licensing) https://www.jmp.com/en_fi/academic/licensing-for-students.html . Which JMP version are you using? 18?

 

I have referred to this earlier https://www.jmp.com/support/help/en/18.0/#page/jmp/rare-event-control-charts.shtml

jthi_1-1728289240613.png

 

-Jarmo
faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

@jthi 

Yes: JMP Student version 18

you show

faustoG_0-1728289835328.png

It IS NONSENSE, from JMP

I do not know how they justify that...

YOU can use "picosecond" and transform a fraction of a second into an integer value

Multiply the values in my document by 1000 and make the T Chart, IF you want.

Let's see what happens

faustoG

 

 

 

dlehman1
Level V

Re: Individual Control Chart

I can verify that, at least on my JMP Pro 18, the T chart does require integer values.  I'm not sure why - and I'm not clear on why that should be necessary mathematically or conceptually (perhaps it is a computational reason specific to JMP, but I don't know).  In any case, it isn't clear to me that your data is measuring the time between events.  You still haven't described what is being measured.  Nor do I understand what you are saying is wrong with the control limits I calculated in the file I attached.  Please refrain from the caps, bold fonts, and harsh words - it might be due to a language difference - but regardless I find it distracting and disturbing.  I don't use control charts much and so I don't have much background with anything but the most straightforward ones - which your case is not.  I'd like to understand what is appropriate for your data and I'm trying to help as well.  The section you quote that "a traditional plot of these data might contain many points at zero" also does not seem to match your data (which does not have this characteristic).  I know it would help me understand what is going on if you can say something about what these measurements are.

faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

You write

  • in  any case, it isn't clear to me that your data is measuring the time between events. 
  • You still haven't described what is being measured
  • I know it would help me understand what is going on if you can say something about what these measurements are.

This is taken from the document that shows the data

(I do not know anything more). So, please, ...

  1. Data were provided from a large hospital system concerned with a very high rate of hospital-acquired urinary tract infections (UTIs). Specifically, the hospital would like to track the frequency of patients being discharged who had  acquired a UTI while in the hospital as a way to quickly identify an increase in infection rate or, conversely, monitor whether forthcoming process or material changes result in fewer infections. Because the root cause often differs based on gender, male and female patients are charted separately and this example focuses on males.
    The data, which can be seen in the appendix, appear to satisfy the distributional assumption for use of the t chart, with the mean time between male UTI patients at 0.21 days or about 5 hours. The data were plotted using the proposed t chart method and demonstrate statistical control.
  2. The importance of tracking this and similar metrics in a health care setting is the quick identification of an increase in infection rates, which results in two significant costs to the hospital. The health cost to the patient is significant and made more severe by a higher rate of death among patients who contract infections while hospitalized. In 2002, the most recent year of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting, there were an estimated 424,060 hospital-acquired UTIs among adults not in an intensive care unit in the United States, and 13,088 deaths (Klevens et al. 007). Further, the financial cost to the hospital is significant, with Medicare no longer covering the cost to treat hospital-acquired infections. Nearly 80% of the patients who acquired UTIs in this study were covered by Medicare or Medicaid, resulting in a very large expense to the hospital.
  3. As can be seen from the chart, the data do not show any signs of process degradation or improve ment but the chart can be continuously monitored to detect such changes as quickly as possible.

====================================================================================

Does this help with the data analysis?

You say also:

  • Nor do I understand what you are saying is wrong with the control limits I calculated in the file I attached.

As I said previously

  1. the data are Exponentially distributed
  2. therefore, the Ranges are Exponentially distributed, as well, with the same mean
  3. so, the Control Limits cannot be very different in the two charts

You say, also:

  • I can verify that, at least on my JMP Pro 18, the T chart does require integer values.
  1. Multiply my data by 100000 and you get integer values.
  2. Try to find the T chart
  3. and see

faustoG

 

Re: Individual Control Chart

A P-chart seems appropriate for tracking the number of patients with UTI ('defectives'), with the sample size being the total number of patients discharged in the same period. The Poisson distribution is used for counts such as this case.

faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

Thank you, BUT it is not useful for my "JMP Student Edition".

I hope it is useful for other people in the Community.

faustoG

faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

Thank you.

I'll come back as soon as I analysed the Control Chart and the Bruno File

faustoG

faustoG
Level I

Re: Individual Control Chart

Dear: dlehman1 (Level V)

 
The fact that
  • The fitted Weibull distribution has a shape parameter of 1.03, not the value of 1 which would match the exponential distribution (which accounts for the slight difference in the goodness of fit tests).   So, one unanswered question is how to get the T chart that the JMP help refers to. 
is important.
The fact that
  •  the disparity between Shewhart's use of 3 standard deviations (based on the Normal distribution) and Shewhart's verbal description that no particular distribution is assumed.  ...useful without specifying a particular distribution, but the use of 3 suggests a reliance on the Normal distribution (at least in the default chart).   I attached the control chart I produced using the manually entered LCL and UCL from that earlier document.
depends, as I said before, on the Central Limit Theorem, ALWAYS (I know that you do not like caps, and bold letters! BUT they are important to highlight things).
About T Charts see the attached file
faustoG
 
 
 
 

 

 
dlehman1
Level V

Re: Individual Control Chart

Your further explanation definitely helps me.  Your data is the time between events (I'm not sure why there was a description saying that such data often has many zeros - yours has no zeros and I would think zero time between events would be fairly unusual).  In any case, I did as you suggest and multiplied the data by 1000 and rounded it to integers, so I am able to get the T chart with sigma set from a Weibull distribution.  I'm attaching a picture of the T chart as well as the "standard" IR chart where I defined the LCL and UCL according to the formula in the document I had linked to.  The pictures are similar, although the control limits don't match.  I'm not sure why - and it could either be the document's formula being incorrect or it could be differences between the Weibull and fitted Exponential distributions.  Both show the same qualitative result - that the process seems to be stable.  But the large differences in the control limits means someone with more knowledge will need to comment.  And, yes, I don't like caps.