![Page 1: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Two-sample tests
![Page 2: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions)
Outcome Variable
Are the observations correlated? Alternative to the chi-square test if sparse cells:
independent correlated
Binary or categorical(e.g. fracture, yes/no)
Chi-square test: compares proportions between two or more groups
Relative risks: odds ratios or risk ratios
Logistic regression: multivariate technique used when outcome is binary; gives multivariate-adjusted odds ratios
McNemar’s chi-square test: compares binary outcome between correlated groups (e.g., before and after)
Conditional logistic regression: multivariate regression technique for a binary outcome when groups are correlated (e.g., matched data)
GEE modeling: multivariate regression technique for a binary outcome when groups are correlated (e.g., repeated measures)
Fisher’s exact test: compares proportions between independent groups when there are sparse data (some cells <5).
McNemar’s exact test: compares proportions between correlated groups when there are sparse data (some cells <5).
![Page 3: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Recall: The odds ratio (two samples=cases and controls)
Smoker (E) Non-smoker (~E)
Stroke (D) 15 35
No Stroke (~D) 8 42
50
50
25.28*35
42*15
bc
adOR
Interpretation: there is a 2.25-fold higher odds of stroke in smokers vs. non-smokers.
![Page 4: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Inferences about the odds ratio…
Does the sampling distribution follow a normal distribution?
What is the standard error?
![Page 5: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Simulation… 1. In SAS, assume infinite population of cases and
controls with equal proportion of smokers (exposure), p=.23 (UNDER THE NULL!)
2. Use the random binomial function to randomly select n=50 cases and n=50 controls each with p=.23 chance of being a smoker.
3. Calculate the observed odds ratio for the resulting 2x2 table.
4. Repeat this 1000 times (or some large number of times).
5. Observe the distribution of odds ratios under the null hypothesis.
![Page 6: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Properties of the OR (simulation)(50 cases/50 controls/23% exposed)
Under the null, this is the expected variability of the sample ORnote the right skew
![Page 7: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Properties of the lnOR
Normal!
![Page 8: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Properties of the lnOR
From the simulation, can get the empirical standard error (~0.5) and p-value (~.10)
![Page 9: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Properties of the lnOR
dcba
1111
Or, in general, standard error =
![Page 10: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Inferences about the ln(OR)
Smoker (E) Non-smoker (~E)
Stroke (D) 15 35
No Stroke (~D) 8 42
50
50
81.0)ln(
25.2
OR
OR
64.1494.0
81.0
421
351
151
81
0)25.2ln(
Z p=.10
![Page 11: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Confidence interval…
Smoker (E) Non-smoker (~E)
Stroke (D) 15 35
No Stroke (~D) 8 42
50
50
92.5,85.0, CI %95
78.1,16.0494.0*96.181.0ln CI %9578.116.
eeOR
OR
Final answer: 2.25 (0.85,5.92)
![Page 12: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Practice problem:
Suppose the following data were collected in a case-control study of brain tumor and cell phone usage:
Brain tumor No brain tumor
Own a cell phone
20 60
Don’t own a cell phone
10 40
Is there sufficient evidence for an association between cell phones and brain tumor?
![Page 13: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Answer
1. What is your null hypothesis?Null hypothesis: OR=1.0; lnOR = 0Alternative hypothesis: OR 1.0; lnOR>0 2. What is your null distribution? lnOR~ N(0, ) ; =SD (lnOR) = .44 3. Empirical evidence: = 20*40/60*10 =800/600 = 1.33 lnOR = .288 4. Z = (.288-0)/.44 = .65p-value = P(Z>.65 or Z<-.65) = .26*2
5. Not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no association
40
1
60
1
20
1
10
1
40
1
60
1
20
1
10
1
TWO-SIDED TEST
TWO-SIDED TEST: it would be just as extreme if the sample lnOR were .65 standard deviations or more below the null mean
![Page 14: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Key measures of relative risk: 95% CIs OR and RR:
dcbadcba
111196.1
111196.1
exp*OR ,exp*OR
c
dcc
a
baa
c
dcc
a
baa )/(1)/(196.1
)/(1)/(196.1
exp*RR ,exp*RR
For an odds ratio, 95% confidence limits:
For a risk ratio, 95% confidence limits:
![Page 15: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Continuous outcome (means)
Outcome Variable
Are the observations independent or correlated?Alternatives if the normality assumption is violated (and small sample size):
independent correlated
Continuous(e.g. pain scale, cognitive function)
Ttest: compares means between two independent groups
ANOVA: compares means between more than two independent groups
Pearson’s correlation coefficient (linear correlation): shows linear correlation between two continuous variables
Linear regression: multivariate regression technique used when the outcome is continuous; gives slopes
Paired ttest: compares means between two related groups (e.g., the same subjects before and after)
Repeated-measures ANOVA: compares changes over time in the means of two or more groups (repeated measurements)
Mixed models/GEE modeling: multivariate regression techniques to compare changes over time between two or more groups; gives rate of change over time
Non-parametric statistics
Wilcoxon sign-rank test: non-parametric alternative to the paired ttest
Wilcoxon sum-rank test (=Mann-Whitney U test): non-parametric alternative to the ttest
Kruskal-Wallis test: non-parametric alternative to ANOVA
Spearman rank correlation coefficient: non-parametric alternative to Pearson’s correlation coefficient
![Page 16: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The two-sample t-test
![Page 17: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
The two-sample T-test
Is the difference in means that we observe between two groups more than we’d expect to see based on chance alone?
![Page 18: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
The standard error of the difference of two means
**First add the variances and then take the square root of the sum to get the standard error.
mnyx
yx
22
Recall, Var (A-B) = Var (A) + Var (B) if A and B are independent!
![Page 19: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Shown by simulation:
91.30
5SE
91.30
5SE
91.30
5SE
91.30
5SE
29.130
25
30
25)( diffSE
One sample of 30 (with SD=5). One sample of
30 (with SD=5).
Difference of the two samples.
![Page 20: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Distribution of differences
),(~22
mnNYX
yxyxmn
If X and Y are the averages of n and m subjects, respectively:
![Page 21: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
But…
As before, you usually have to use the sample SD, since you won’t know the true SD ahead of time…
So, again becomes a T-distribution...
![Page 22: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Estimated standard error of the difference….
m
s
n
s yxyx
22
Just plug in the sample standard deviations for each group.
![Page 23: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Case 1: un-pooled variance
Question: What are your degrees of freedom here?
Answer: Not obvious!
![Page 24: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Case 1: ttest, unpooled variances
It is complicated to figure out the degrees of freedom here! A good approximation is given as df ≈ harmonic mean (or SAS will tell you!):
t
m
s
n
s
YXT
yx
mn ~22
mn
112
![Page 25: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Case 2: pooled variance
If you assume that the standard deviation of the characteristic (e.g., IQ) is the same in both groups, you can pool all the data to estimate a common standard deviation. This maximizes your degrees of freedom (and thus your power).
2
)()(
)()1( and 1
)(
)()1( and 1
)(
: variancespooling
1
2
1
2
2
1
221
2
2
1
221
2
2
mn
yyxx
s
yysmm
yy
s
xxsnn
xx
s
m
imi
n
ini
p
m
imiy
m
imi
y
n
inix
n
ini
x
2
)1()1( 222
mn
smsns yx
p
Degrees of Freedom!
![Page 26: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Estimated standard error (using pooled variance estimate)
m
s
n
s ppyx
22
2
)()(
:
1
2
1
2
2
mn
yyxx
s
wherem
imi
n
ini
p
The degrees of freedom are n+m-2
![Page 27: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Case 2: ttest, pooled variances
222
~
mn
pp
mn t
m
s
n
s
YXT
2
)1()1( 222
mn
smsns yx
p
![Page 28: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Alternate calculation formula: ttest, pooled variance
2~
mn
p
mn t
mn
nms
YXT
)()()11
( 2222
mn
mns
mn
m
mn
ns
nms
n
s
m
sppp
pp
![Page 29: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Pooled vs. unpooled variance
Rule of Thumb: Use pooled unless you have a reason not to.
Pooled gives you more degrees of freedom.
Pooled has extra assumption: variances are equal between the two groups.
SAS automatically tests this assumption for you (“Equality of Variances” test). If p<.05, this suggests unequal variances, and better to use unpooled ttest.
![Page 30: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Example: two-sample t-test In 1980, some researchers reported that
“men have more mathematical ability than women” as evidenced by the 1979 SAT’s, where a sample of 30 random male adolescents had a mean score ± 1 standard deviation of 436±77 and 30 random female adolescents scored lower: 416±81 (genders were similar in educational backgrounds, socio-economic status, and age). Do you agree with the authors’ conclusions?
![Page 31: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Data Summary
n Sample
Mean
Sample Standard Deviation
Group 1:women
30 416 81
Group 2:men
30 436 77
![Page 32: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Two-sample t-test
1. Define your hypotheses (null, alternative)H0: ♂-♀ math SAT = 0
Ha: ♂-♀ math SAT ≠ 0 [two-sided]
![Page 33: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Two-sample t-test2. Specify your null distribution:
F and M have similar standard deviations/variances, so make a “pooled” estimate of variance.
624558
81)29(77)29(
2
)1()1( 22222
mn
smsns fm
p
)30
6245
30
6245,0(~ 583030 TFM 4.20
30
6245
30
6245
![Page 34: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Two-sample t-test
3. Observed difference in our experiment = 20 points
![Page 35: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Two-sample t-test
4. Calculate the p-value of what you observed
98.4.20
02058
T
data _null_;
pval=(1-probt(.98, 58))*2;
put pval;
run; 0.3311563454
5. Do not reject null! No evidence that men are better in math ;)
![Page 36: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Example 2: Difference in means
Example: Rosental, R. and Jacobson, L. (1966) Teachers’ expectancies: Determinates of pupils’ I.Q. gains. Psychological Reports, 19, 115-118.
![Page 37: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
The Experiment (note: exact numbers have been altered)
Grade 3 at Oak School were given an IQ test at the beginning of the academic year (n=90).
Classroom teachers were given a list of names of students in their classes who had supposedly scored in the top 20 percent; these students were identified as “academic bloomers” (n=18).
BUT: the children on the teachers lists had actually been randomly assigned to the list.
At the end of the year, the same I.Q. test was re-administered.
![Page 38: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Example 2 Statistical question: Do students in the
treatment group have more improvement in IQ than students in the control group?
What will we actually compare? One-year change in IQ score in the
treatment group vs. one-year change in IQ score in the control group.
![Page 39: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
“Academic bloomers”
(n=18)Controls (n=72)
Change in IQ score: 12.2 (2.0) 8.2 (2.0)
Results:
12.2 points 8.2 points
Difference=4 points
The standard deviation of change scores was 2.0 in both groups. This affects statistical significance…
![Page 40: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
What does a 4-point difference mean?
Before we perform any formal statistical analysis on these data, we already have a lot of information.
Look at the basic numbers first; THEN consider statistical significance as a secondary guide.
![Page 41: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Is the association statistically significant?
This 4-point difference could reflect a true effect or it could be a fluke.
The question: is a 4-point difference bigger or smaller than the expected sampling variability?
![Page 42: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Hypothesis testing
Null hypothesis: There is no difference between “academic bloomers” and normal students (= the difference is 0%)
Step 1: Assume the null hypothesis.
![Page 43: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
These predictions can be made by mathematical theory or by computer simulation.
Step 2: Predict the sampling variability assuming the null hypothesis is true
![Page 44: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
Step 2: Predict the sampling variability assuming the null hypothesis is true—math theory:
0.42 p
s
)52.072
4
18
4,0(~ 88"" Tcontrolgifted
![Page 45: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
In computer simulation, you simulate taking repeated samples of the same size from the same population and observe the sampling variability.
I used computer simulation to take 1000 samples of 18 treated and 72 controls
Step 2: Predict the sampling variability assuming the null hypothesis is true—computer simulation:
![Page 46: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Computer Simulation Results
Standard error is about 0.52
![Page 47: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
3. Empirical data
Observed difference in our experiment = 12.2-8.2 = 4.0
![Page 48: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
4. P-value
t-curve with 88 df’s has slightly wider cut-off’s for 95% area (t=1.99) than a normal curve (Z=1.96)
p-value <.0001
852.
4
52.
2.82.1288
t
![Page 49: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
If we ran this study 1000 times, we wouldn’t expect to get 1 result as big as a difference of 4 (under the null hypothesis).
Visually…
![Page 50: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
5. Reject null!
Conclusion: I.Q. scores can bias expectancies in the teachers’ minds and cause them to unintentionally treat “bright” students differently from those seen as less bright.
![Page 51: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Confidence interval (more information!!)
95% CI for the difference: 4.0±1.99(.52) = (3.0 – 5.0)
t-curve with 88 df’s has slightly wider cut-off’s for 95% area (t=1.99) than a normal curve (Z=1.96)
![Page 52: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
What if our standard deviation had been higher?
The standard deviation for change scores in treatment and control were each 2.0. What if change scores had been much more variable—say a standard deviation of 10.0 (for both)?
![Page 53: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Standard error is 0.52 Std. dev in
change scores = 2.0
Std. dev in change scores = 10.0
Standard error is 2.58
![Page 54: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
With a std. dev. of 10.0…LESS STATISICAL POWER!
Standard error is 2.58
If we ran this study 1000 times, we would expect to get +4.0 or –4.0 12% of the time.
P-value=.12
![Page 55: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Don’t forget: The paired T-test Did the control group in the previous
experiment improveat all during the year?
Do not apply a two-sample ttest to answer this question!
After-Before yields a single sample of differences…
“within-group” rather than “between-group” comparison…
![Page 56: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Continuous outcome (means);
Outcome Variable
Are the observations independent or correlated?Alternatives if the normality assumption is violated (and small sample size):
independent correlated
Continuous(e.g. pain scale, cognitive function)
Ttest: compares means between two independent groups
ANOVA: compares means between more than two independent groups
Pearson’s correlation coefficient (linear correlation): shows linear correlation between two continuous variables
Linear regression: multivariate regression technique used when the outcome is continuous; gives slopes
Paired ttest: compares means between two related groups (e.g., the same subjects before and after)
Repeated-measures ANOVA: compares changes over time in the means of two or more groups (repeated measurements)
Mixed models/GEE modeling: multivariate regression techniques to compare changes over time between two or more groups; gives rate of change over time
Non-parametric statistics
Wilcoxon sign-rank test: non-parametric alternative to the paired ttest
Wilcoxon sum-rank test (=Mann-Whitney U test): non-parametric alternative to the ttest
Kruskal-Wallis test: non-parametric alternative to ANOVA
Spearman rank correlation coefficient: non-parametric alternative to Pearson’s correlation coefficient
![Page 57: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Data Summary
n Sample
Mean
Sample Standard Deviation
Group 1:Change
72 +8.2 2.0
![Page 58: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Did the control group in the previous experiment improveat all during the year?
2829.
2.8
722
02.8271
t
p-value <.0001
![Page 59: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Normality assumption of ttest
If the distribution of the trait is normal, fine to use a t-test.
But if the underlying distribution is not normal and the sample size is small (rule of thumb: n>30 per group if not too skewed; n>100 if distribution is really skewed), the Central Limit Theorem takes some time to kick in. Cannot use ttest.
Note: ttest is very robust against the normality assumption!
![Page 60: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Alternative tests when normality is violated: Non-parametric tests
![Page 61: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Continuous outcome (means);
Outcome Variable
Are the observations independent or correlated?Alternatives if the normality assumption is violated (and small sample size):
independent correlated
Continuous(e.g. pain scale, cognitive function)
Ttest: compares means between two independent groups
ANOVA: compares means between more than two independent groups
Pearson’s correlation coefficient (linear correlation): shows linear correlation between two continuous variables
Linear regression: multivariate regression technique used when the outcome is continuous; gives slopes
Paired ttest: compares means between two related groups (e.g., the same subjects before and after)
Repeated-measures ANOVA: compares changes over time in the means of two or more groups (repeated measurements)
Mixed models/GEE modeling: multivariate regression techniques to compare changes over time between two or more groups; gives rate of change over time
Non-parametric statistics
Wilcoxon sign-rank test: non-parametric alternative to the paired ttest
Wilcoxon sum-rank test (=Mann-Whitney U test): non-parametric alternative to the ttest
Kruskal-Wallis test: non-parametric alternative to ANOVA
Spearman rank correlation coefficient: non-parametric alternative to Pearson’s correlation coefficient
![Page 62: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Non-parametric tests
t-tests require your outcome variable to be normally distributed (or close enough), for small samples.
Non-parametric tests are based on RANKS instead of means and standard deviations (=“population parameters”).
![Page 63: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Example: non-parametric tests
10 dieters following Atkin’s diet vs. 10 dieters following Jenny Craig
Hypothetical RESULTS:Atkin’s group loses an average of 34.5 lbs.
J. Craig group loses an average of 18.5 lbs.
Conclusion: Atkin’s is better?
![Page 64: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Example: non-parametric tests
BUT, take a closer look at the individual data…
Atkin’s, change in weight (lbs):+4, +3, 0, -3, -4, -5, -11, -14, -15, -300
J. Craig, change in weight (lbs)-8, -10, -12, -16, -18, -20, -21, -24, -26, -30
![Page 65: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Jenny Craig
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Percent
Weight Change
![Page 66: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
Atkin’s
-300 -280 -260 -240 -220 -200 -180 -160 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Percent
Weight Change
![Page 67: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
t-test inappropriate…
Comparing the mean weight loss of the two groups is not appropriate here.
The distributions do not appear to be normally distributed.
Moreover, there is an extreme outlier (this outlier influences the mean a great deal).
![Page 68: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
Wilcoxon rank-sum test RANK the values, 1 being the least weight
loss and 20 being the most weight loss. Atkin’s +4, +3, 0, -3, -4, -5, -11, -14, -15, -300 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 20 J. Craig -8, -10, -12, -16, -18, -20, -21, -24, -26, -30 7, 8, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
![Page 69: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Wilcoxon rank-sum test Sum of Atkin’s ranks: 1+ 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 9 + 11+ 12 +
20=73 Sum of Jenny Craig’s ranks:7 + 8 +10+ 13+ 14+ 15+16+ 17+
18+19=137
Jenny Craig clearly ranked higher! P-value *(from computer) = .018
*For details of the statistical test, see appendix of these slides…
![Page 70: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions)
Outcome Variable
Are the observations correlated? Alternative to the chi-square test if sparse cells:
independent correlated
Binary or categorical(e.g. fracture, yes/no)
Chi-square test: compares proportions between two or more groups
Relative risks: odds ratios or risk ratios
Logistic regression: multivariate technique used when outcome is binary; gives multivariate-adjusted odds ratios
McNemar’s chi-square test: compares binary outcome between two correlated groups (e.g., before and after)
Conditional logistic regression: multivariate regression technique for a binary outcome when groups are correlated (e.g., matched data)
GEE modeling: multivariate regression technique for a binary outcome when groups are correlated (e.g., repeated measures)
Fisher’s exact test: compares proportions between independent groups when there are sparse data (some cells <5).
McNemar’s exact test: compares proportions between correlated groups when there are sparse data (some cells <5).
![Page 71: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Difference in proportions (special case of chi-square test)
![Page 72: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
Standard error of the difference of two proportions=
21
2211
212
22
1
11 )()(n where,
)1()1(or
)ˆ1(ˆ)ˆ1(ˆ
nn
pnpp
n
pp
n
pp
n
pp
n
pp
Standard error of a proportion=n
pp )1(
Null distribution of a difference in proportions
Standard error can be estimated by=
(still normally distributed)n
pp )ˆ1(ˆ
Analagous to pooled variance in the ttest
The variance of a difference is the sum of variances (as with difference
in means).
![Page 73: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
Null distribution of a difference in proportions
Difference of proportions ))1()1(
,(~21
21 n
pp
n
ppppN
![Page 74: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Difference in proportions test
Null hypothesis: The difference in proportions is 0.
21
21
)1(*)1(*n
ppn
pp
ppZ
2 groupin number
1 groupin number
2 groupin proportion
1 groupin proportion
)proportion average(just
2
1
2
1
21
2211
n
n
p
p
nn
pnpnp
Recall, variance of a proportion is p(1-p)/n
Use average (or pooled) proportion in standard error formula, because under the null hypothesis, groups have equal proportions.
Follows a normal because binomial can be approximated with normal
![Page 75: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
Recall case-control example:
Smoker (E) Non-smoker (~E)
Stroke (D) 15 35
No Stroke (~D) 8 42
50
50
![Page 76: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
Absolute risk: Difference in proportions exposed
%14%16%30
50/850/15)~/()/(
DEPDEP
Smoker (E) Non-smoker (~E)
Stroke (D) 15 35
No Stroke (~D) 8 42
50
50
![Page 77: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
Difference in proportions exposed
67.1084.
14.
5077.*23.
5077.*23.
%0%14
Z
.31 to03.0084.*96.114 .0:CI %95
![Page 78: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
Example 2: Difference in proportions
Research Question: Are antidepressants a risk factor for suicide attempts in children and adolescents?
Example modified from: “Antidepressant Drug Therapy and Suicide in Severely Depressed Children and Adults ”; Olfson et al. Arch Gen Psychiatry.2006;63:865-872.
![Page 79: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
Example 2: Difference in Proportions Design: Case-control study Methods: Researchers used Medicaid
records to compare prescription histories between 263 children and teenagers (6-18 years) who had attempted suicide and 1241 controls who had never attempted suicide (all subjects suffered from depression).
Statistical question: Is a history of use of antidepressants more common among cases than controls?
![Page 80: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
Example 2 Statistical question: Is a history of use of
antidepressants more common among heart disease cases than controls?
What will we actually compare? Proportion of cases who used
antidepressants in the past vs. proportion of controls who did
![Page 81: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
No (%) of cases
(n=263)
No (%) of controls (n=1241)
Any antidepressant drug ever 120 (46%) 448 (36%)
46% 36%
Difference=10%
Results
![Page 82: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
Is the association statistically significant?
This 10% difference could reflect a true association or it could be a fluke in this particular sample.
The question: is 10% bigger or smaller than the expected sampling variability?
![Page 83: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
Hypothesis testing
Null hypothesis: There is no association between antidepressant use and suicide attempts in the target population (= the difference is 0%)
Step 1: Assume the null hypothesis.
![Page 84: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
Step 2: Predict the sampling variability assuming the null hypothesis is true
)033.=1241
)1504
5681(
1504
568
+263
)1504
5681(
1504
568
=σ,0(N~p̂p̂ controlscases
![Page 85: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
Also: Computer Simulation Results
Standard error is about 3.3%
![Page 86: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
Step 3: Do an experiment
We observed a difference of 10% between cases and controls.
![Page 87: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
Hypothesis Testing
Step 4: Calculate a p-value
003.=p;0.3=033.
10.=Z
![Page 88: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
When we ran this study 1000 times, we got 1 result as big or bigger than 10%.
P-value from our simulation…
We also got 3 results as small or smaller than –10%.
![Page 89: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
P-valueP-value
From our simulation, we estimate the p-value to be:
4/1000 or .004
![Page 90: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
Here we reject the null.
Alternative hypothesis: There is an association between antidepressant use and suicide in the target population.
Hypothesis Testing
Step 5: Reject or do not reject the null hypothesis.
![Page 91: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
What would a lack of statistical significance mean?
If this study had sampled only 50 cases and 50 controls, the sampling variability would have been much higher—as shown in this computer simulation…
![Page 92: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
Standard error is about 10%
50 cases and 50 controls.
Standard error is about 3.3% 263 cases and
1241 controls.
![Page 93: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
With only 50 cases and 50 controls…
Standard error is about 10%
If we ran this study 1000 times, we would expect to get values of 10% or higher 170 times (or 17% of the time).
![Page 94: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
Two-tailed p-value
Two-tailed p-value = 17%x2=34%
![Page 95: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
Practice problem…
An August 2003 research article in Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics reported the following about a sample of UK kids: when given a choice of a non-branded chocolate cereal vs. CoCo Pops, 97% (36) of 37 girls and 71% (27) of 38 boys preferred the CoCo Pops. Is this evidence that girls are more likely to choose brand-named products?
![Page 96: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
Answer1. Hypotheses:
H0: p♂-p♀= 0
Ha: p♂-p♀≠ 0 [two-sided]
2. Null distribution of difference of two proportions:
3. Observed difference in our experiment = .97-.71= .26
4. Calculate the p-value of what you observed:
085.38
)16(.84.
37
)16(.84.
)38
)75
631(
75
63
37
)75
631(
75
63
,0(~ˆˆ
Npp mf
data _null_;
pval=(1-probnorm(3.06))*2;
put pval;
run;
0.0022133699
5. p-value is sufficiently low for us to reject the null; there does appear to be a difference in gender preferences here.
Null says p’s are equal so estimate standard error using overall observed p
06.3085.
026.
Z
![Page 97: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
Key two-sample Hypothesis Tests…
Test for Ho: μx- μy = 0 (σ2 unknown, but roughly equal):
Test for Ho: p1- p2= 0:
2
)1()1(;
222
222
n
snsns
n
s
n
s
yxt
yyxxp
y
p
x
p
n
21
2211
21
21 ˆˆ;
)1)(()1)((
ˆˆ
nn
pnpnp
n
pp
n
pp
ppZ
![Page 98: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
Corresponding confidence intervals…
For a difference in means, 2 independent samples (σ2’s unknown but roughly equal):
For a difference in proportions, 2 independent samples:
y
p
x
pn n
s
n
styx
22
2/,2)(
212/21
)1)(()1)(()ˆˆ(
n
pp
n
ppZpp
![Page 99: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
Appendix: details of rank-sum test…
![Page 100: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
Wilcoxon Rank-sum test
),min(12
)1(2
Z
2
)1(U
,10 ,01for 2
)1(U
)(n populationlarger thefrom ranks theof sum theis T
)(n populationsmaller from ranks theof sum theis T
n. to1 fromorder in nsobservatio theof allRank
210
2121
210
222
212
21111
211
22
11
UUU
nnnn
nnU
Tnn
nn
nnTnn
nn
Find P(U² U0) in Mann-Whitney U tablesWith n2 = the bigger of the 2 populations
![Page 101: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
Example
For example, if team 1 and team 2 (two gymnastic teams) are competing, and the judges rank all the individuals in the competition, how can you tell if team 1 has done significantly better than team 2 or vice versa?
![Page 102: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
Answer Intuition: under the null hypothesis of no difference between the
two groups… If n1=n2, the sums of T1 and T2 should be equal. But if n1 ≠n2, then T2 (n2=bigger group) should automatically be
bigger. But how much bigger under the null?
For example, if team 1 has 3 people and team 2 has 10, we could rank all 13 participants from 1 to 13 on individual performance. If team1 (X) and team2 don’t differ in talent, the ranks ought to be spread evenly among the two groups, e.g.…
1 2 X 4 5 6 X 8 9 10 X 12 13 (exactly even distribution if team1 ranks 3rd, 7th, and 11th)
(larger) 2 group of ranks of sum
(smaller) 1 group of ranks of sum
2
1
T
T
![Page 103: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
2122112
2221121
21
2121
121
2
)1(
2
)1(
2
)(
2
)1)((21
nnnnnnnnnnnnnn
nnnniTT
nn
i
Remember this?
sum of within-group ranks for smaller group.
2
)1( 11
1
1
nni
n
i
sum of within-group ranks for larger group.
2
)1( 22
1
2
nni
n
i
30655912
)14)(13(:here e.g.,
13
121
i
iTT
212211
21 2
)1(
2
)1(nn
nnnnTT
Take-home point:
![Page 104: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
49655
62
)4(3
552
)11(10
3
1
10
1
i
i
i
T1 = 3 + 7 + 11 =21T2 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 8 + 9 +10 + 12 +13 = 70
70-21 = 49 Magic!
The difference between the sum of theranks within each individual group is 49.
The difference between the sum of theranks of the two groups is also equal to 49if ranks are evenly interspersed (null istrue).
It turns out that, if the null hypothesis is true, the difference between the larger-group sum of ranks and the smaller-group sum of ranks is exactly equal to the difference between T1 and T2
2
)1(
2
)1(
null, Under the
112212
nnnnTT
![Page 105: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
. equal should sumTheir 2
)1( Udefine
2
)1( Udefine
22
)1(22
)1(
2
)1(
2
)1(2
)1(
2
)1(
21
12111
1
22122
2
21111
21222
112212
212211
12
nn
Tnnnn
Tnnnn
nnnnT
nnnnT
nnnnTT
nnnnnn
TT
From slide 23
From slide 24
Define new statistics
Here, under null:
U2=55+30-70
U1=6+30-21
U2+U1=30
![Page 106: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
under null hypothesis, U1 should equal U2:
0 )]T()2
)1(
2
)1([()U- E(U 12
112212
T
nnnnE
The U’s should be equal to each other and will equal n1n2/2: U1 + U2 = n1n2
Under null hypothesis, U1 = U2 = U0
E(U1 + U2) = 2E(U0) = n1n2
E(U1 = U2=U0) = n1n2/2
So, the test statistic here is not quite the difference in the sum-of-ranks of the 2 groups
It’s the smaller observed U value: U0
For small n’s, take U0, and get p-value directly from a U table.
![Page 107: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/107.jpg)
For large enough n’s (>10 per group)…
)(2
)(
)( Z
0
210
0
00
UVar
nnU
UVar
UEU
2)( 21
0
nnUE
12
)1()( 2121
0
nnnnUVar
![Page 108: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/108.jpg)
Add observed data to the example…
Example: If the girls on the two gymnastics teams were ranked as follows:
Team 1: 1, 5, 7 Observed T1 = 13
Team 2: 2,3,4,6,8,9,10,11,12,13 Observed T2 = 78
Are the teams significantly different?
Total sum of ranks = 13*14/2 = 91 n1n2=3*10 = 30
Under the null hypothesis: expect U1 - U2 = 0 and U1 + U2 = 30 (each should equal about 15 under the null) and U0
= 15
U1=30 + 6 – 13 = 23
U2= 30 + 55 – 78 = 7
U0 = 7
Not quite statistically significant in U table…p=.1084 (see attached) x2 for two-tailed test
![Page 109: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/109.jpg)
Example problem 2
A study was done to compare the Atkins Diet (low-carb) vs. Jenny Craig (low-cal, low-fat). The following weight changes were obtained; note they are very skewed because someone lost 100 pounds; the mean loss for Atkins is going to look higher because of the bozo, but does that mean the diet is better overall? Conduct a Mann-Whitney U test to compare ranks. Atkins Jenny Craig
-100 -11
-8 -15
-4 -5
+5 +6
+8 -20
+2
![Page 110: Two-sample tests. Binary or categorical outcomes (proportions) Outcome Variable Are the observations correlated?Alternative to the chi- square test if](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062620/551b01f45503465e7d8b57df/html5/thumbnails/110.jpg)
Answer Atkins Jenny Craig1 45 37 69 1011 28
Sum of ranks for JC = 25 (n=5)Sum of ranks for Atkins=41 (n=6) n1n2=5*6 = 30
under the null hypothesis: expect U1 - U2 = 0 and
U1 + U2 = 30 and U0 = 15
U1=30 + 15 – 25 = 20
U2= 30 + 21 – 41 = 10
U0 = 10; n1=5, n2=6
Go to Mann-Whitney chart….p=.2143x 2 = .42