Timeline for Very wide confidence intervals for odds ratios
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apr 24, 2017 at 23:04 | vote | accept | Fred | ||
Apr 23, 2017 at 17:35 | comment | added | Fred | @jjet The reason using odds ratios in the interpretation of binary logit models (logistic regression) is preferred to probabilities (or elasiticities, as econometricians do) is that in binary logit odds ratios are independent of the value of the explanatory variable or other explanatory variables. This is not true for probabilities. The amount of change in proabilities for each c unit change in an explanatory variable is not the same for different values of the explanatory variable. | |
Apr 22, 2017 at 14:42 | comment | added | jjet | @rolando2 good catch. I didn't read closely enough to see that he was referring to odds ratios. | |
Apr 22, 2017 at 12:37 | comment | added | rolando2 | @jjet I agree with your comment up until your calculation. The change in prob. of success (or the range of such change) will not be constant across the dataset, but will vary depending on the baseline or benchmark prob. of the group of cases to which one is comparing. I.e., 1.91 is an odds ratio, not an odds. | |
Apr 21, 2017 at 20:07 | answer | added | GeoMatt22 | timeline score: 5 | |
Apr 21, 2017 at 19:45 | comment | added | jjet | Odds can be pretty misleading. People generally tend to use the word "odds" when technically they are referring to probabilities. I understand that in some contexts, odds are desired over probabilities. However, that's often not the case. And you can simply convert the bounds on your odds into bounds on probabilities. For C8, you could say "we are 95% confident that a c unit increase in x changes the [probability] of success by [1.91/(1+1.91)=.655] to [476.4/(1+476.4=.998]." | |
Apr 21, 2017 at 19:40 | answer | added | Dave Harris | timeline score: 3 | |
Apr 21, 2017 at 19:21 | history | asked | Fred | CC BY-SA 3.0 |