Timeline for Comparing relative risks of independent samples
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 31, 2017 at 17:34 | history | edited | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 14 characters in body
|
| Mar 28, 2016 at 17:46 | vote | accept | John | ||
| Mar 28, 2016 at 12:14 | comment | added | Wolfgang | Ok, makes sense now. And I just found the time to write up an answer. So, actually, I need to recall my initial suggestion to consider methods described under the link I posted and instead approach this in the way described under my answer. Thank you for raising some doubts about my initial suggestion and drawing out the crucial distinction. | |
| Mar 28, 2016 at 12:08 | answer | added | Wolfgang | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 26, 2016 at 16:26 | history | edited | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Mar 26, 2016 at 16:23 | comment | added | Wolfgang | Thanks. I assume the study variable is supposed to be 1,1,2,2 (and not 1,2,1,2 as it is right now), right? | |
| Mar 26, 2016 at 15:50 | comment | added | John | Thank you @Wolfgang. I have amended the question to included example data, as requested. | |
| Mar 26, 2016 at 15:48 | history | edited | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
To provide example data required for problem solution.
|
| Mar 26, 2016 at 14:38 | comment | added | Wolfgang | I see. In that case, it would be better to compute the difference between the two log(RRs) (for older/younger) within the two studies and then pool those values to see if the pooled difference is significantly different from zero. If I understand you correctly, there are only 4 RRs here (two studies, with two subgroups each) -- so if you could add those RRs (and 95% CIs) to your question, I can show you how to do this. | |
| Mar 26, 2016 at 9:13 | comment | added | John |
Thank you @Wolfgang. Your link contains everything that I need to do the test. I just wanted to double check that it is OK to use the (Separate Meta-Analyses) method in my situation. In your example, you compare completely separate studies (i.e. with different alloc), whereas I compare subgroups (i.e. either older or younger than 50) from the same studies (different participants in the subgroups but taken from the same studies). I am just worried that my subgroups are not independent in the same way that your studies are (given within study effects).
|
|
| Mar 5, 2016 at 15:56 | comment | added | Wolfgang | I don't have the time right now to turn this into a complete answer, but basically everything you are asking about is covered here: metafor-project.org/doku.php/… | |
| Mar 4, 2016 at 13:16 | answer | added | mdewey | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 4, 2016 at 11:40 | history | asked | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |