Timeline for Strategy for a one-sided test of GLM's coefficient(s)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2018 at 3:41 | vote | accept | NULL | ||
| Mar 1, 2018 at 3:41 | comment | added | NULL | Right, thanks for pointing it out. I over wrote the variable somehow. | |
| Feb 28, 2018 at 20:29 | comment | added | Benjamin Christoffersen |
Further, sum(tab) is 1057 while the fit has null deviance with 1037 df.
|
|
| Feb 28, 2018 at 20:08 | comment | added | Benjamin Christoffersen |
Whatever data you used when you estimated the GLM is not the same. The predicted value for group B is 1/(1 + exp(-(-.047+.339))) which is 0.5724857. I.e., not 0.1213873.
|
|
| Feb 28, 2018 at 18:41 | comment | added | NULL |
Great answer. Why the one-sided prop.test results in pvalue of 0.08434 while the regression approach's pvalue is about 0.03? What do you recommend in these scenarios?
|
|
| Feb 26, 2018 at 21:20 | history | answered | Benjamin Christoffersen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |