1985
DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1985.10478212
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computing an Exact Confidence Interval for the Common Odds Ratio in Several 2×2 Contingency Tables

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
91
0
1

Year Published

1991
1991
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 164 publications
(92 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
91
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Difference in genotype frequencies were investigated by using an exact χ 2 test of independence. In addition, differences in grouped genotypes were described by using odds ratios and exact 95% CIs, 25 with exploratory P values from the exact test by Fisher.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Difference in genotype frequencies were investigated by using an exact χ 2 test of independence. In addition, differences in grouped genotypes were described by using odds ratios and exact 95% CIs, 25 with exploratory P values from the exact test by Fisher.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Odds ratios were used to estimate the association between detection of HPV DNA and sérologie evidence of HIV, with the significance of this association being measured by the x2 testConfidence limits for the odds ratio were obtained by using Cornfield's approximation as described by Fleiss.21 For tables containing small numbers, exact limits were calculated on the ba¬ sis of an algorithm by Mehta et al 22 Adjustments for potential confounders were made by the use of multiple logistic regression analyses,23 in which the presence or absence of HIV was the de¬ pendent variable and detection of HPV DNA and potential confounders were the independent variables.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…None of the samples displayed marked dental attrition, which may obliterate DEHs near the incisal edge (Cook, 1981, p. 135). DEH frequencies were compared between individuals in subgroup defined at each site (QAIA: Greco-Roman vs. no Greco-Roman artifacts; Rehovot: North Church vs. northern cemetery burials) and between the two sites using Fisher's exact mean statistic for categorical data, which provides a more robust estimate for small samples than the Chi-square statistic (Mehta et al, 1985;Siegel, 1956). Additionally, the p-values for multiple comparisons between QAIA and Rehovot and all regional sites were adjusted using Sidak's method to control for familywise error (Sidak, 1967).…”
Section: Dental Enamel Hypoplasiasmentioning
confidence: 99%