Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 26, Issue 19, 2007, Pages 3661-3675

  Campbell, Ian ^a  

^a IC Statistical Services   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chi squared test; Fisher Irwin test; Power; Small sample recommendations; Two by two tables

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; BIOSTATISTICS; CHI SQUARE TEST; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; CONTINGENCY TABLE; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FISHER EXACT TEST; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; POWER ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; YATES CONTINUITY CORRECTION;

CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; GREAT BRITAIN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 34547543618     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.2832     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. 2 test. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Supplement 1934; 1:217-235.
2. Barnard GA. Significance tests for 2 × 2 tables. Biometrika 1947; 34:123-138.
3. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions (2nd edn). Wiley: Chichester, 1981.
4. Upton GJG. A comparison of alternative tests for the 2 × 2 comparative trial. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1982; 145:86-105.
5. Pearson K. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series 5 1900; 50:157-172.
6. 2 from contingency tables, and the calculation of P. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1922; 85:87-94.
7. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS. Statistical Methods in Medical Research (4th edn). Blackwell: Oxford, 2002.
8. Pearson ES. The choice of statistical tests illustrated on the interpretation of data classed in a 2 × 2 table. Biometrika 1947; 34:139-167.
9. Barnard GA. 2 × 2 tables: a note on ES Pearson's paper. Biometrika 1947; 34:168-169.
10. Schouten HJA, Molenaar IW, van Strik R, Boomsma A. Comparing two independent binomial proportions by a modified chi square test. Biometrical Journal 1980; 22:241-248.
11. Richardson JTE. Variants of chi-square for 2 × 2 contingency tables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 1990; 43:309-326.
12. Richardson JTE. The analysis of 2 × 1 and 2 × 2 contingency tables: a historical review. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1994; 3:107-134.
13. Stuart A, Ord JK, Arnold S. Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics, vol. 2A (6th edn). Arnold: London, 1999; 17.
14. 2 test of goodness of fit. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1952; 25:315-345.
15. 2 tests. Biometrics 1954; 10:417-451.
16. Cochran WG. The χ2 correction for continuity, Iowa State College Journal of Science 1942; 16:421-436.
17. Fisher RA. The logic of inductive inference. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1935; 98:39-54.
18. Irwin JO. Testa of significance for differences between percentages based on small numbers. Metron 1935; 12:83-94.
19. Yates F. Tests of significance for 2 × 2 contingency tables (with Discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1984; 147:426-463.
20. Cormack RS, Mantel N. Fisher's exact test: the marginal totals as seen from two different angles. Statistician 1991; 40:27-34.
21. Barnard GA. Discussion on tests of significance for 2 × 2 contingency tables (by F Yates). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1984; 147:449-450.
22. Barnard GA. On alleged gains in power from lower P values. Statistics in Medicine 1989; 8:1469-1477.
23. Plackett RL. Discussion on tests of significance for 2 × 2 contingency tables (by F Yates). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1984; 147:458.
24. Hirji KF, Tan S, Elashoff RM. A quasi-exact test for comparing two binomial proportions. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10:1137-1153.
25. Berry G, Armitage P. Mid-P confidence intervals: a brief review. Statistician 1995; 44:417-423.
26. Hill ID, Pike MC. Algorithm 4: TWOBYTWO Computer Bulletin 1965; 9:56-63.
27. Sahai H, Khurshid A. On analysis of epidemiological data involving a 2 × 2 contingency table: an overview of Fisher's exact test and Yates' correction for continuity. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1995; 5:43-70.
28. Berkson J. In dispraise of the exact test. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 1978; 2:27-42.
29. D'Agostino RB, Chase B, Belanger A. The appropriateness of some common procedures for testing the equality of two independent binomial populations. The American Statistician 1988; 42:198-202.
30. 2-test for 2 × 2 tables. The American Statistician 1967; 21:28-32.
31. Kurtz TE. A role of time-sharing computing in statistical research. The American Statistician 1968; 22:19-21.
32. Garside GR, Mack C. Actual Type I error probabilities for various tests in the homogeneity case of the 2 × 2 contingency table. The American Statistician 1976; 30:18-21.
33. Camilli G, Hopkins JD. Applicability of chi-square to 2 × 2 contingency tables with small expected cell frequencies. Psychological Bulletin 1978; 85:163-167.
34. Overall JE, Rhoades M, Starbuck RR. Small-sample tests for homogeneity of response probabilities in 2 × 2 contingency tables. Psychological Bulletin 1987; 102:307-314.
35. Camilli G, Hopkins JD. Testing for association in 2 × 2 contingency tables with very small sample sizes. Psychological Bulletin 1979; 86:1011-1014.
36. Roscoe JT, Byars JA. An investigation of the restraints with respect to sample size commonly imposed on the use of the chi-square statistic. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1971; 66:755-759.
37. Haber M. An exact unconditional test for the 2 × 2 comparative trial. Psychological Bulletin 1986; 99:129-132.
38. Rhoades HM, Overall JE. A sample size correction for Pearson chi-square in 2 × 2 contingency tables. Psychological Bulletin 1982; 91:418-423.
39. Hwang JTG, Yang M.-C. An optimality theory for mid p-values in 2 × 2 contingency tables. Statistica Sinica 2001; 11:807-826.
40. Bradley DR, Cutcomb S. Monte Carlo simulations and the chi-square test of independence. Behaviour Research Methods and Instrumentation 1977;9:193-201.
41. Storer BE, Kim C. Exact properties of some exact test statistics for comparing two binomial proportions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1990; 85:146-155.
42. Jagger G. Discussion on tests of significance for 2 × 2 contingency tables (by F Yates). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1984; 147:455.
43. Suissa S, Shuster JJ. Exact unconditional sample sizes for the 2 × 2 binomial trial. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 1985; 148:317-327.
44. http://www.iancampbell.co.uk/twobytwo 2006
45. Berkson J. Do the marginal totals of the 2 × 2 table contain relevant information respecting the table proportions? Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 1978;2:43-44.
46. Plackett RL. The continuity correction in 2 × 2 tables. Biometrika 1964; 51:327-337.
47. Kempthorne O. In dispraise of the exact test: reactions. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 1979; 3:199-213.