Timeline for Is it normal to obtain better (smaller) P values in multivariate analysis compared to bivariate one?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2013 at 11:11 | comment | added | Vic | Many many thanks Peter :) Ok I would trust both :) yes yes the CIs are reported. I am reporting both actually (multi and bivariate). | |
| May 9, 2013 at 11:10 | comment | added | Peter Flom | Trust both. They answer different questions. Which one do you want to answer? Maybe both! Do you want the OR controlled or uncontrolled? Also, check the CI. | |
| May 9, 2013 at 11:09 | comment | added | Vic | So in this case, which one would you trust? :) I tend to trust the multivariate one, but it is a little bit too high! | |
| May 9, 2013 at 11:08 | comment | added | Vic | But another problem emerged right now! :) which one should I trust? The OR of treatment in the bivariate analysis (chi-squared contingency table) is something reasonable, but the OR of the same predictor (treatment) is extreme (it is about 0.1) and differs with the OR if bivariate (about 0.3 or so). | |
| May 9, 2013 at 11:04 | comment | added | Vic | WOW such a nice answer. THANKS. (Since you were interested in my design, it had a binary variable (absence/presence of a disease) and 5 predictors (demographics and treatment) including binary (such as gender) and continuous (actually ordinal -age for example) ones.) Thanks again :) | |
| May 9, 2013 at 11:00 | vote | accept | Vic | ||
| May 9, 2013 at 10:42 | history | answered | Peter Flom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |