Literature DB >> 14695382

Proportions, odds, and risk.

Christopher L Sistrom1, Cynthia W Garvan.   

Abstract

Perhaps the most common and familiar way that the results of medical research and epidemiologic investigations are summarized is in a table of counts. Numbers of subjects with and without the outcome of interest are listed for each treatment or risk factor group. By using the study sample data thus tabulated, investigators quantify the association between treatment or risk factor and outcome. Three simple statistical calculations are used for this purpose: difference in proportions, relative risk, and odds ratio. The appropriate use of these statistics to estimate the association between treatment or risk factor and outcome in the relevant population depends on the design of the research. Herein, the enumeration of proportions, odds ratios, and risks and the relationships between them are demonstrated, along with guidelines for use and interpretation of these statistics appropriate to the type of study that gives rise to the data. Copyright RSNA, 2004

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14695382     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2301031028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  24 in total

1.  A likelihood ratio test for nested proportions.

Authors:  Yi-Fan Chen; Jonathan G Yabes; Maria M Brooks; Sonia Singh; Lisa A Weissfeld
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  What is so odd about odds?

Authors:  Bernard Montreuil; Yves Bendavid; James Brophy
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Emotional reactivity and regulation associated with fluent and stuttered utterances of preschool-age children who stutter.

Authors:  Robin M Jones; Edward G Conture; Tedra A Walden
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2014-02-23       Impact factor: 2.288

4.  Medial femur T2 Z-scores predict the probability of knee structural worsening over 4-8 years: Data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Gabby B Joseph; Charles E McCulloch; Michael C Nevitt; Alexandra S Gersing; Benedikt J Schwaiger; Martin Kretzschmar; Ursula Heilmeier; Thomas M Link
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  The value of time-intensity curves obtained after microbubble contrast agent injection to discriminate responders from non-responders to anti-inflammatory medication among patients with Crohn's disease.

Authors:  Emilio Quaia; Biagio Cabibbo; Luca De Paoli; William Toscano; Gabriele Poillucci; Maria Assunta Cova
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Respecting Autonomy And Enabling Diversity: The Effect Of Eligibility And Enrollment On Research Data Demographics.

Authors:  Kayte Spector-Bagdady; Shengpu Tang; Sarah Jabbour; W Nicholson Price; Ana Bracic; Melissa S Creary; Sachin Kheterpal; Chad M Brummett; Jenna Wiens
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 6.301

7.  Maximin optimal designs for cluster randomized trials.

Authors:  Sheng Wu; Weng Kee Wong; Catherine M Crespi
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 1.701

8.  Moderate alcohol consumption and cognitive risk.

Authors:  Edward J Neafsey; Michael A Collins
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 2.570

9.  Outcomes of usual chiropractic, harm & efficacy, the ouch study: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Bruce F Walker; Barrett Losco; Brenton R Clarke; Jeff Hebert; Simon French; Norman J Stomski
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 2.279

10.  Musculoskeletal disorders among full-time homemakers in poor communities.

Authors:  Rima R Habib; Monia Hamdan; Iman Nuwayhid; Fatma Odaymat; Oona M R Campbell
Journal:  Women Health       Date:  2005
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.