-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
oddsratio: accept raw odds #102
Comments
Odds ratios are bad measures of association. When base rates differ, the same odds ratio can represent very different degrees of association/correlation. I suggest that this warning be added to all odds ratio output. |
Yeah… Added Tangentially, we're writing up a replication of a study that had n= 30 divided between 2 groups. In group1, just 4 of 15 subjects responded, in group2: 11 of 15... Post-hoc power analysis χ² suggests n = 10 gives 99% power to replicate… We ran with n= 30 and got… p = 0.6 Science train badly off the rails :-( Oh well, learned how to compute a χ² effect size. Imagine if R was around in the 80s when Cohen and power hit the headlines… might have rippled much faster with open-source... library(pwr)
ES.w1(c(11/15, 4/15), c( 2/15, 13/15))
effect size = 1.36 !! in education... |
oddsratio(grp1 = c(n= 1, N= 10), grp2 = c(n = 3, N = 10))
Group 1 odds = 0.111
Group 2 odds = 0.429
OR = 0.259 CI95 [0.023, 2.936]
oddsratio(grp1 = 1/9, grp2 = 3/9)
Group 1 odds = 0.111
Group 2 odds = 0.333
OR = 0.333 (input odds as c(n=, N=) to compute CI)
note: When base rates differ, a given odds ratio can represent very different degrees of association/correlation |
currently user says:
let's allow:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: