# Shared Flashcard Set

## Details

3C04-U5-Crit_Apprais_Tx(PartB)
for exam of effectiveness of a Tx. In this unit the focus will be on the Tx study results to practice
34
Nursing
04/05/2011

## Additional Nursing Flashcards

Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 4-5)   Relative Risk (RR) (probability)
Definition
 AKA: probability (of a good or bad result) (Cullum, 2000 p111)   Term used when referring o the probability of either a good or bad event The risk of an event in the intervention group (Ri) is simply the proportion of people in that group who experience the event. The strength of the association between the intervention and the outcome is usually represented y the relative risks or adds ratios Relative Risk or Risk Ratio (RR) is the proportion of the original risk that is still present when patients receive the intervention The proportion of risk that is still present when patients receive the intervention or exposure. Studies providde estimates of the true risk of an outcome An RR provides and estimate of the risk of a given outcome tells the relative benefit of treatment, NOT the “actual” benefit not consider # Ss who would developed outcome anyways The risk of patients in the intervention or exposed group experiencing the outcome divided by the risk of patients in the control or unexposed group experiencing the outcome Proportion of patients experiencing an outcome in the treated (or exposed) group divided by the proportion experiencing the outcome in the control (or unexposed) group (text, glossary) Risk of Ri group divided by risk Rc group (Sheldon, 2000 p76) Equations [a/(a+b)] / [c/(c+d)] Also… Ri / Rc   Also… EER / CER Calculate the risk of readmission in the Intervention Group:    a / (a+b) = 12 / 84 = 0.143 or 14.3% Calculate the risk of readmission in the Control Group:           c / (c+d) = 26 / 81 = 0.321 or 32.1% Now, compare the two by dividing Intervention by Control       = 0.143 / 0.321 = 0.445 or 44.5% (If RR=1.0 then there is no difference between groups; the risk of event/outcome is the same in both groups). If RR is on the right side of vertical line (RR >1) would favour the CTRL condition o   RR on the left (RR <1) favours the treatment. If the risk of a bad outcome is reduced by the intervention compared to the control group, then RR < 1.0. If risk of a bad outcome is increased by the intervention compare to the control group, then RR > 1.0. The further away the RR is from 1.0, the greater the strength of the association between the intervention and outcome Statement: The relative risk of readmission of the Intervention group is 44.5% compared to the Controls Statement: over 7 years, the risk of dying after admission to a stroke unit was 0.67 or 67% of the risk of dying after admission to a medical ward.
Term
 U5 (text p.77-8, 79, 180-2, 189-90, 198-200, 174) (ppt, p. 5-2)   Odds Ratio (OR) [(a/b) - (c/d)]
Definition
 • Describes the odds of a patient in the Ri group having an event divided by the odds of a patient is the Rc having the event • Or the odds that a patient was exposed to a given risk factor divided by the odds of that a control patient was exposed to the risk factor an estimate of the odds of having an event versus not having an event  • The odds of an event in the intervention or exposed group divided by the odds of the event in the control or unexposed group • If (OR = 1.0) then there is no difference between groups; the odds of the event is the same in both groups). • If (OR < 1.0) then the outcome/event is less likely in the intervention or exposed group compared to the control or unexposed group • The odds of the outcome (event) in the Ri group divided by the odds of the Rc group First, calculate the odds of readmission for the Intervention = a / b = 12 / 72 = 0.167 Then, calculate the odds of readmission for the Control = c / d =    26 / 55 = 0.473 Finally, divide the odds of the Ri by the Rc = (a / b) / (c / d) = 0.167 / 0.473 = 0.353 So, the odds of readmission for the intervention group are 0.353 times that of the control group (or 35.3% of the odds of the control group) • (a/b) / (c/d) • Also… (ad) / (bc) a measure of the strength of association between the Tx and the outcome a measure of effect in studies of causation The odds of an event in the intervention/exposed group divided by the odds of the event in the control/unexposed group  the odds that a Ss was exposed to a given risk factor divided by the odds that a Ctrl was exposed to the risk factor. the outcome expressed as the ____ of the event (a/b) The ____ ____ is the odds of the event in the Tx group (a/b) devided by the odds of the event in the Ctrl group (c/d) an ____ ____ of 1.0 means there is no difference between groups the odds of an even are the same an ____ ____ <1.0 means the event is less likely in the Tx group than the control group When the event being measured is quite rare, the OR and RR are numerically similar because the values of a and c are insignificantly small odds of death in Tx group odds of death in Ctrl group Statement: "the odds of dying in the Tx group are 48% of the odds of dying in the control group in case-control studies > we use the ____ ____ as the measure of the size of the effect of the exposure on the outcome **the calculation of ____ ____ is not confined to case-control studies the odds are calculated by dividing the number of ppl with the condition by those without the ratio are obtained by dividing the odds of having an event following an exposure by odds of have the same event who were unexposed the OR and RR are similar when freq of outcome is low but as outcome increases frequency > OR and RR diverge If the 95% CI does NOT include 1 (the null), there is evidence to reject the null hypothesis in Case-Control studies, the proportion of Ss with the adverse event (cases) is determined a priori by investigator so, the strength of association in case control studies is represented as ___ ___ OR's of 1 indicate the Tx and Ctrl did NOT diff for the adverse event OR's >1 indicate increased risk of the adverse event among those in the Tx group,  OR's < 1 indicate a decreased risk of the event in the Tx group The furthar from 1 > greater strength of an association between the Tx and outcome  estimate the odds of having an event versus not having an event This is called the Odds Ratio (OR) First, calculate the odds of readmission for the Intervention  = a / b = 12 / 72 = 0.167 Then, calculate the odds of readmission for the Control  = c / d =    26 / 55 = 0.473 Finally, divide the odds of the Intervention by the Control  = (a / b) / (c / d) = 0.167 / 0.473 = 0.353 Statement: the odds of readmission for the intervention group are 0.353 times that of the control group (or 35.3% of the odds of the control group)
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 5-3)   Number Needed To Treat (NTT)
Definition
 The number of ppl needed to treat with the intervention, over a specific period of time, to prevent one additional adverse outcome; or promo one additional good outcome Number of patients who need to be treated to prevent one additional negative outcome (or to promote one additional positive evenT) This is calculated as 1/ARR (rounded to the next whole number), accompanied by the 95% confidence interval. How many people would we need to treat to prevent one adverse event (or improve one patient’s outcome)? In other words, how many asthmatics would have to see the Specialist Nurse in order to prevent one of them from being readmitted? We calculated the ARR to be 17.8% (which we will round to 18) This means, that for every 100 patients who see the Specialist Nurse, 18 will avoid readmission How many will we have to treat to avoid 1 readmission? NNT = 1 / ARR = 1 / 0.18 = 5.6  (always round up) So, for every 6 asthmatics who see the Specialist Nurse, we prevent 1 of them from being readmitted
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 6-3)   Confidence Intervals (CI)
Definition
 AKA: confidence limits (Cullum, 2000 p112) A 95% CI > Rr is 95% sure of the true treatment effect. (Cullum, 2000 p112) If larger sample size > higher precision > narrower width of 95% CI. (Cullum, 2000 p112) Instead of p-values, many studies are now reporting ____ ____ ____ ____ also help us understand whether a study finding is statistically significant or not The benefit of confidence intervals is that they help us to interpret the clinical significance of the findings as well When we observe a difference between the Intervention and Control Groups, the Confidence Interval asks “What is the range of differences between the two groups within which the we would find the true difference?”  If we go back to our original Weight Loss example, we provided a point estimate (means) for both the Drug Group and the Control Group We ran a t-test to see if those means were statistically different But instead of comparing 2 points, we can expand the results and compare 2 intervals These intervals will take into account 95% of the variance represented by our Means  We are 95% confident that this interval contains the population mean [image]   Our Drug Group had a Mean weight loss of 14.4 lbs The 95% CI is 10.9 to 17.9 We are 95% confident that this interval contains the true weight loss of the whole population if they took the drug     [image]   Our Placebo Group had a Mean weight loss of 7.3 lbs The 95% CI is 5.4 to 9.2 So, we are 95% confident that this interval contains the true weight loss of the population without the drug   [image]    Now we compare the confidence intervals to each other Drug Group = 10.9 to 17.9 Placebo Group = 5.4 to 9.2 Because the Upper Limit of the Placebo Group fails to exceed the Lower Limit of the Drug Group, we can conclude that there is a difference between the two groups
Term
 U5 (pp, 2-6)   Mean Difference (aka: mean effect size)
Definition
 Mean is the “average value” from a data set It is a single number that summarized a mass of data points and allows for easy comparison between groups.However, it is sensitive to extreme scores
Term
 U5 (Chapt 12)   Statistical Significance
Definition
Term
 U5 ()   Clinical Importance
Definition
Term
 U5 (ppt, p.2-6) (Cullum, 2000 p73) Mean (mean effect size)
Definition
 Mean is the “average value” from a data set It is a single number that summarized a mass of data points  _____ allows easy comparison between groups. However, _____ is sensitive to extreme scores
Term
 U5 ()   Median
Definition
Term
 U5 (pp, slide 2-6)   Standard Deviation
Definition
 Standard Deviation (SD) is the most common measure of variance SD describes how far the values stray from the Mean A small SD will indicate the scores are closer to the Mean, while data with a large SD indicates scores are scattered over a wider range around the mean Smaller is better! Watch to see how close the SD value is to the mean Average amount individual values differ from the mean of the group (Cullum, 2000 p73) ____ ____ (SD) is the most common measure of variance SD describes how far the values stray from the Mean A small SD will indicates scores are closer to the Mean a large SD indicates scores are scattered over a wider range around the mean Smaller is better! Watch to see how close the SD value is to the mean Lower SD = smaller spread of values (Cullum, 2000 p73)
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 4-1) (Text p.73)   Discrete Outcome
Definition
• To compute ____ ____ measures of association, we “count bodies” that belong to different categories
• We look at these variables in terms of proportions and we use a 2 x 2 table

 Present absent present a b absent c d

• measures used for discrete outcomes:
• Relative Risk (RR)
• Relative Risk Reduction (RRR)
• Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR)
• Odds Ratio (OR)
• Number Needed to Treat (NNT)
• Number Needed to Harm (NNH)

Term
 U5 (ppt, p2-5) (Cullum, 2000 p72)   Continuous Outcome
Definition
 The weight loss study example involves continuous data  (i.e., body weight measured in lbs or kilo) To analyze our results, we would look at the two groups as a whole by calculating the Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) for each group Our Drug (Intervention) Group of 25 people had a mean weight loss of 14.4 lbs (SD=8.5) Our Placebo (Control) Group of 25 people had a mean weight loss of 7.3 lbs (SD=4.5) It looks like there is a difference, but is it a True difference?
Term
 U5 (text p104, 142, )   Precise (precision)
Definition
 How precise is the estimate of treatment effect? (Cullum, p104) A large number of subjects increases precision (Cullum, p104) CI’s around the RR and the RRR indicate The precision of the estimate of true treatment effect Wide CIs = less precision in the estimate Precision increases with larger sample size
Term
 U5 (ppt, p9-2) What is Precision of the study Findings?
Definition
 Precision of study findings is indicated by the width of the CI: The wider the CI, the less precise our study finding The narrower the CI, the more precise our study finding Precision of study findings depends on the Sample Size of the study: The smaller the Sample Size, the wider the CI and the less precise the study finding The larger the Sample Size, the narrower the CI and the more precise the study finding
Term
 U5 (ppt 1-2)   Null Hypothesis
Definition
 • there is no difference between the interventions or between intervention and control (no intervention) groups • in other words > the difference between them is 0 • We assume the null hypothesis is true until our analysis of our research data proves otherwise\ (i.e., we start by assuming weight loss in the two groups is the same) • If the difference in weight loss between the Intervention and Control Groups becomes large enough, we may disprove the null hypothesis • In doing so, the opposite will be true, that is, there is a difference between our groups
Term
 U5 ()   Alternative (research) hypothesis
Definition
Term
 U5 (ppt 1-6) (glossary)   p-value
Definition
 • A mistake some researchers make is claiming there is a difference between their groups when there isn’t one (Type I Error) • If we can produce a small enough alpha level, we will be more confident there is no Type I error, and therefore, that the differences b/w groups is due to diff's that is r/t the intervention • The alpha level is denoted with a p value‬ • A typical value would be p < 0.05 • “the probability that the difference occurred by chance or randomly, is less than 5%” • “we are 95% sure the difference we see is a true difference” • The most common minimum threshold for acceptance is 95% or p < .05 • Any result that achieves the minimum threshold (or better) is considered statistically significant
Term
 U5 (ppt 1-6)   Type I error (false-positive)
Definition
 A mistake some researchers make is claiming there is a difference between their groups when there isn’t one. This is called Type I Error To help combat this, researchers will declare a statistic called the alpha level, which is the probability they accept of making this error (e.g., <0.05, or < 5%) If we can produce a small enough alpha level, we will be more confident that there is no Type I error, and therefore, that the difference between groups is a true difference that is related to our intervention.
Term
 U5 (ppt 2-3,4)   Type II error (false-negative)
Definition
 AKA “False-Negative” Occurs when we conclude the tx has no effect, when it really does This is called Type ___ Error E.g., It is possible at the end of our weight loss study that the Drug Group lost more weight than the Placebo Group, and this difference occurred because of the drug But, to our disappointment, p = 0.06 The most common reason for Type II error is a Sample Size that is too small Most statistical tests require a large number of observations in order to detect a true difference The ability to properly detect a true difference when it exists is called Power The easiest way to increase Power is to increase Sample Size  The larger the Sample Size, the greater the Power, which results in less risk of Type II
Term
 U5 (ppt 2-4) (glossary)   Power
Definition
 The ability to properly detect a true difference when it exists is called Power The easiest way to increase Power is to increase Sample Size  The larger the Sample Size, the greater the Power, which results in less risk of Type II
Term
 U5 (pp, p3-1)   t-Test
Definition
 We need to run a statistical test to compare weight loss in the two groups Weight loss is a continuous variable In this case, we use a t-Test to compare the two groups A t-Test is designed to determine if the difference between mean values of 2 groups is statistically significant Our null hypothesis: There is no difference in weight loss between the Drug and Placebo Groups Result: t = 3.7, p < 0.001 What does this p - value tell us? ___ ___ Used to compare [variable] between 2 groups (e.g. males or females; Drug or Placebo) in terms of some continuous variable (e.g. mean weight or height) A t-Test is designed to determine & compare if the difference between mean values of 2 groups is statistically significant  used to compare a [variable] b/w 2 groups Limitation: only looks at 2 groups
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 3-6)   Chi-Squared Test (c2)
Definition
 the most common nonparametric test  used to measure the statistical significance of an association between 2 nominal (categorical or dichotomous) variables It determines the difference between the observed and expected frequencies of the occurrence of the variables and creating a variance term deals with dichotomous variables (yes / no)
Term
 U5 (ppt p3-2)   ANOVA (Analysis of Variance)
Definition
 ANOVA: Used to compare 3 or more groups  (e.g. single/married/widowed; Drug 1/Drug 2/Placebo) when their variable is continuous (e.g. mean weight or height) t-Test used when only two groups
Term
 U5 (ppt, p.4-6) (U43,4,6,7,8) Statistic Summary)   Relative Risk Reduction
Definition

• ____ ____ ____ = (1.0 - RR)
• An estimate of the proportion of baseline risk that is reduced by the intervention
• Easy to calculate
• 1.0 – Relative Risk = 1.0 – 0.445 = 0.555 or 55.5%
• This means that the Specialist Nurse (Intervention) decreased the risk of hospital readmission by 55.5% compared with Regular Care
 Readmitted Not Readmitted Total Specialist Nurse 12 72 84 Regular Care 26 55 81

Term
 U5 U3,4.5.7,8) statistics summary (ppt, p. 5-1 (text, p. 78, 79, 122-3))   Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR)  [c/(c+d)] - [a/(a+b)]
Definition
 The absolute arithmetic difference in rates of harmful outcomes between Ri and Rc groups takes into account the basement risk of patients  provides more detailed info than RRR The proportion of patients that will be spared an adverse outcome if they receive the intervention I.E. the risk of a bad outcome is reduced this much by the intervention NOTE:  ARR uses absolute value (no sign) Telss us what percent of patients  will be spared the adverse outcome if they receive the intervention Caluculate th risk of readmission in the Control group: c/(c+d) Calculate the risk of readmission in the Intervention group: a/a+b Now > subtract the Intervention from the Ctrl: Ri - Rc statement: _x_% of asthma patients will not be readmitted to the hospital if they receive the special nursing care ** be aware of the ___ ___ ___ of an event when trying to assess the importance of a finding expressed as an RR or RRR.
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 5-4)   Number Needed to Harm (NNH)
Definition
 •             the number of patients who, if they receive the intervention, would result in one additional patient being “harmed” •               The number of people who, if treated with the intervention, would lead to one additional adverse event or peron being harmed over a specific period of time •               Could be the case if the intervention is LESS effective than the control condition •               Could be used to express harmful effect of an otherwise beneficial intervention •                 •               Calculation is the same as NNT (1/ARR) •               (remember we use the absolute number for ARR) •               To decide whether you are calculating NNT or NNH, you need to look at the event rates in each group (e.g., your 2X2 table) and determine whether:     a) a higher proportion of patients in the intervention group experienced a good outcome:  calculate an NNT     b) a higher proportion of patients in the intervention group experienced a bad outcome: calculate an NNH •               NNH is used in conjunction with NNT because while treatments may be designed to have positive outcomes, they are often also associated with adverse effects (or negative outcomes) ◦                                 EXAMPLE: Daily aspirin is often recommended for those at risk of stroke to reduce their risk (a positive outcome); however, daily use of aspirin may also cause internal bleeding (a negative outcome) •               Consider that a common way to decrease the chances of a stroke is to take blood thinners •               Two common blood thinners are Warfarin and Aspirin, both of which have been proven to reduce the risk of stroke •               The NNT for Warfarin is 37 while for Aspirin it is 67 •               Which is better? Warfarin, because it has a positive impact on every 37 people who take it while Aspirin has a positive impact on every 67 people •                However, this is only one side of the picture •               What if the NNH of Warfarin is 10 while the NNH of Aspirin is 90? •               Now, Warfarin is not looking too good •               In words, this means that for every 10 people treated with Warfarin, one will have internal bleeding •               If the NNH is substantially lower than the NNT, the risk-benefit ratio  would argue against the use of that drug or treatment •               1.0/ARI ARI (absolute risk increase); the risk of a bad outcome is increased by the intervention •               also, 1.0/[c/(c+d)] - [a/(a+b)] •               also, 1/[CER-EER]
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 7-3)   Interpreting CI's
Definition
 When we look at CIs OF CONTINUOUS DATA, we need to think of three things: 1) Does it cross 0?      2) How wide is it?      3) Where are the limits? [image] [image] Line A Does not cross 0 à there is a difference; statistically significant The width is quite narrow à the sample size is large and the results are more precise The lower limit is not far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a tight range which increases precision Line B Does not cross 0 à there is a difference; statistically significant The width is quite wide à the sample size is small and the results are less precise The lower limit is far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a wide range which decreases precision; hard to make a clinical decision because the true value may be close to 0 or it may be very large Line C Does cross 0 à there is NOT a difference The width is quite wide à the sample size is small and the results are less precise The lower limit is far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a wide range which decreases precision; but, the upper limit is very positive so there may be something to this intervention Line D Does cross 0 à there is NOT a difference The width is quite narrow à the sample size is large and the results are more precise The lower limit is not far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a tight range which increases precision §The concept is the same for Dichotomous Data like Relative Risk
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 7-3)   Interpreting CI's
Definition
 When we look at CIs OF CONTINUOUS DATA, we need to think of three things: 1) Does it cross 0?      2) How wide is it?      3) Where are the limits?   [image]   [image]   Line A Does not cross 0 à there is a difference; statistically significant The width is quite narrow à the sample size is large and the results are more precise The lower limit is not far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a tight range which increases precision Line B Does not cross 0 à there is a difference; statistically significant The width is quite wide à the sample size is small and the results are less precise The lower limit is far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a wide range which decreases precision; hard to make a clinical decision because the true value may be close to 0 or it may be very large Line C Does cross 0 à there is NOT a difference The width is quite wide à the sample size is small and the results are less precise The lower limit is far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a wide range which decreases precision; but, the upper limit is very positive so there may be something to this intervention Line D Does cross 0 à there is NOT a difference The width is quite narrow à the sample size is large and the results are more precise The lower limit is not far from the upper limit à the true value falls within a tight range which increases precision The concept is the same for Dichotomous Data like Relative Risk [image]   The three questions of interpretation are the same but with one slight change: 1) Does it cross 1?      2) How wide is it?      3) Where is the lower limit or upper limit? Remember, for statistics like Relative Risk and Odds Ratio, the “no difference” line is 1.0 On our previous slide, only two CIs are significant Notice that the larger the sample size, the more narrow the CI which means the results are more precise And note that the wide CIs make it difficult for us to decide if the Intervention actually works
Term
 U5 (ppt, p8-2) Using CI's to interp  Positive Results
Definition
 Consider a trial to determine the effect of calcium supplementation (taken to reduce fractures) on myocardial infarctions (MI) in healthy postmenopausal women Results indicate that MI is more common in the calcium group than in the placebo group Relative risk is 3.5 and the 95% CI is 2.10 to 4.47 This means that the risk of MI in the calcium group is 3.5 times higher than in the placebo group but that the true RR may be as low as 2.10 or as high as 4.47 The CI does not include an RR of 1.0 which means the result is statistically significant Having determined that it is statistically significant, we next ask is it clinically significant? Here, we look at the smallest plausible effect of the intervention [i.e., lower limit of the CI (2.10)]. This means that women who take calcium are twice as likely to have an MI than those who don’t. This still represents an important clinical difference and we would want to inform our patients about this risk.
Term
 U5 (ppt, p8-4) Using CI's to Interp Negative Results
Definition
 Consider a trial in a neonatal intensive care unit that compared mortality rates of infants cared for by nurse practitioners (NPs) or pediatric residents The results show that 4.6% of the NP patients died while 5.9% of the residents’ patients died The RR is 0.78 and the 95% CI is 0.43 to 1.40 This means that the risk of neonatal mortality is reduced in the NP group by 22%, but that the true RR could be consistent with a 57% reduction or a 40% increase in neonatal mortality in the NP group     The CI includes an RR of 1 so the difference between groups is not statistically significant (negative trial) The trial failed to show differences between the 2 groups, BUT it also failed to exclude the possibility of important differences in neonatal mortality (because the CI was so large) Therefore, the recommendation would be that a larger study be conducted to address this question which would provide a more precise study finding In a negative trial, the CI can help determine whether the trial was definitely negative If the boundary of the CI most in favour of the intervention excludes any important benefit, then the trial is definitely negative If this boundary includes an important benefit, the trial has not ruled out the possibility that the intervention may be beneficial & a larger study is needed
Term
 U5 (ppt, p8-6) Summary: Interpreting Confidence Intervals
Definition
 CIs can tell us 3 things: Is the difference between groups significant? What is the precision of the study finding? What is the clinical significance of the study findings?
Term
 U5 (ppt, 9-1) is the difference between groups Significant?
Definition
 If comparing continuous data, ‘no difference’ in mean values is 0  (e.g., 0 difference in mean weight loss indicates the 2 groups are the same) Since 0 indicates no difference, a CI containing 0 would indicate a non significant mean difference If comparing dichotomous data, then a “no difference” in RRs or ORs is 1.0  (e.g., RR = 1.0 means that the risk of neonatal death in the NP group is the same as the risk of neonatal death in the resident group) Since 1.0 indicates no difference, a CI containing 1.0 would indicate a non significant ratio (RR or OR)
Term
 U5 (ppt, p. 9-3) What is the Clinical Signif  of the study findings?
Definition
 Once statistical significance has been established, the confidence interval is more informative than a p-value in helping us determine whether the difference between groups is clinically important Clinical importance is determined by examining the limits of the CI for the smallest plausible effect of the intervention and deciding whether this effect is large enough to warrant a change in practice
Term
 U5 (text p67, glossary) (U3,5,6,8 Statistics Summary) Nominal Variables
Definition
 Type of data: Discrete Nominal (categorical) variables are simply names of categories with no specific order. “data that exist as unordered, qualitative categories” (text, p297) sex ethnicity religion Nominal variables that have only two possible values are referered to as dichotomous variables (text p67) male/female/transgender (not dichotomous) dead/alive brown eyes/blue eyes Appropriate Statistics/Tests Relative Risk / Relative Risk Reduction Absolute Risk / Odds Ratio Number Needed to Treat Chi-squared test (X2 test)
Supporting users have an ad free experience!