Where do we go wrong in assessing risk factors, diagnostic and prognostic tests? the problems of two-by-two association

Psychiatric Annals

Volumn 39, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 711-718

  Kraemer, Helena Chmura ^a   Gibbons, Robert D ^b  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951145057     PISSN: 00485713     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3928/00485713-20090625-05     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Meehl PE. Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1978;46:806-834.
2. Jones LV, Tukey JW. A sensible formulation of the significance test. Psychol Methods. 2000;5(4):411-414.
3. Borenstein M. Hypothesis testing and effect size estimation in clinical trials. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1997;78(1):5-16.
4. Borenstein M. The shift from significance testing to effect size estimation. In: Hersen M, ed. Research & Methods, Comprehensive Clinical Psychology. vol 3. Burlington, MD: Elsevier Science Publishing; 1998:319-349.
5. Cohen J. The Earth is round (p<.05). American Psychologist. 1995;49:997-1003.
6. Dar R, Serlin RC, Omer H. Misuse of statistical tests in three decades of psychotherapy research. J Consul Clinical Psychol. 1994;62(1):75-82.
7. Hunter JE. Needed: a ban on the significance test. Psychological Science. 1997;8(1):3-7.
8. Nickerson RS. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychol Methods. 2000;5(2):241-301.
9. Shrout PE. Should significance tests be banned? Introduction to a special section exploring the pros and cons. Psychological Science. 1997;8(1):1-2.
10. Thompson B. Journal editorial policies regarding statistical significance tests: heat is to fire as p is to importance. Educational Psychology Review. 1999;11:157-169.
11. Wilkinson L. Task Force on Statistical Inference. Statistical methods in psychology jour- nals: guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist. 1999;54:594-604.
12. Cohen J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull. 1968;70:213-229.
13. Bloch DA, Kraemer HC. 2X2 kappa coefficients: measures of agreement or association. Biometrics. 1989;45:269-287.
14. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960;20:37-46.
15. Kraemer HC. Evaluating Medical Tests: Objective and Quantitative Guidelines. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1992.
16. Hlatky MA, Mark DB, Harrell FE, Lee KL, Califf RM, Pryor DB. Rethinking sensitivity and specificity. Am J Cardiol. 1987;59(12):1195-1198.
17. Hlatky MA, Pryor DB, Harrell FE, Califf RM, Mark DB, Rosati RA. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of exercise electrocardiography. Am J Med. 1984;77(1):64-71.
18. Fleiss JL. On the asserted invariance of the odds ratio. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1970;24(1):45-46.
19. Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ. 1995;310(6977):452-454.
20. Sackett DL. Down with odds ratios! Evidence-Based Medicine. 1996;1:164-166.
21. Kraemer HC, Kupfer DJ. Size of treatment effects and their importance to clinical research and practice. Biol Psychiatry. 2006;59(11):990-996.
22. Cornfield J. A statistical problem arising from retrospective studies. In: Neyman J, ed. Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Symposium. vol IV. Berekely, CA: University of California Press; 1956:135.
23. Kraemer HC, Kazdin AE, Offord DR, Kessler RC, Jensen PS, Kupfer DJ. Measuring the potency of a risk factor for clinical or policy significance. Psychological Methods. 1999;4(3):257-271.
24. Kraemer HC. Reconsidering the odds ratio as a measure of 2X2 association in a population. Stat Med. 2004;23(2):257-270.
25. Kraemer HC. Correlation coefficients in medical research: from product moment correlation to the odds ratio. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007;15(6):525-545.
26. Newcombe RG. A deficiency of the odds ratio as a measure of effect size. Stat Med. 2006;25(24):4235-4240.
27. Efron B, Tibshirani R. Computer-Intensive Statistical Methods. Stanford, CA: Division of Biostatistics, Stanford University Press; 1995:174.
28. Efron B, Gong G. A leisurely look at the boot-strap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. The American Statistician. 1983;37:36-48.
29. Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics. 1979;7:1-26.
30. Geis I. How to Lie with Statistics. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company; 1954.