+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: Proper Interpretation of odds ratio less than 1 for my study

  1. #16
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 38,303, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Location
    Not Ames, IA
    Posts
    6,993
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,185 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Re: Proper Interpretation of odds ratio less than 1 for my study




    I am sure that I have used genmod, but not regularly. I think of it more like "lm" in R. It is a platform where you then specify the family of regression you are interested in.


    It comes back to, can you use the phrase risk with retrospective data, since it implies the exposure is established before outcome.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  2. #17
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Re: Proper Interpretation of odds ratio less than 1 for my study

    death isn't always the outcome in a model, at least not mine

    Genmode has lots of limitations notably for diagnostics. You would only use it to do RR.
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

  3. #18
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 38,303, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Location
    Not Ames, IA
    Posts
    6,993
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,185 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Re: Proper Interpretation of odds ratio less than 1 for my study

    Using OR is fine. The general public shouldn't be reading actual journal article anyways. It is too easy for them to get misguided. It is better, for them to read synopses designed in layman speak. Unfortunately, some believe the same thing about doctors. They are many publications on how easily results can be misinterpreted.


    A last note, relative risks are not invertible. Thus you can't use the reciprocal method like in OR.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to hlsmith For This Useful Post:

    noetsi (03-25-2016)

  5. #19
    Fortran must die
    Points: 58,790, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    noetsi's Avatar
    Posts
    6,532
    Thanks
    692
    Thanked 915 Times in 874 Posts

    Re: Proper Interpretation of odds ratio less than 1 for my study


    The general public shouldn't be reading actual journal article anyways.
    Elitist

    In honesty reading that article I was not clear substantively what OR meant any more so I could not explain it to others at a substantive level. Technically I know it means the odds of something are X greater than the odds of something else, but that has little intuitive meaning to me. On the other hand what the probability of something is relative to the probability of something else is fairly straightforward.

    I know I have told people routinely that a specific OR means that something is more likely than something else. And in fact that is not correct, it is the odds of something that is more or less likely using the OR.

    Technically, the odds of being assigned are 4.91 times greater for boys relative to girls. But since odds are tricky to understand, the meaning of this is less clear. Technically, it means that for every boy not recommended to remedial reading, 4.91 times as many boys will be recommended for remediation (0.54) than the number of girls recommended for every girl not recommended.
    "Very few theories have been abandoned because they were found to be invalid on the basis of empirical evidence...." Spanos, 1995

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

           




Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts






Advertise on Talk Stats