Notice: On March 31, it was **announced** that Statalist is moving from an email list to a **forum**. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, **statalist.org** is already up and running.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
"Mak, Timothy" <timothy.mak07@imperial.ac.uk> |

To |
"statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: Odds ratio |

Date |
Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:12:38 +0100 |

Hi Rosie and others, Perhaps it's too obvious to point out, but of course the odds ratio is a very good approximation for the risk ratio when the probability of the outcome is small. So if that's the case, I believe that's all you need to point out to the reviewers. But if that's not the case, I think it would be useful to give _raw_ probabilities rather than _predicted_ ones. That's common practice in most medical papers, I think. You can then include your odds ratios + CI on the side. I believe most people are more interested in whether your CI crosses 1 or not. It's also quite standard to report the _raw_ odds ratio followed by the adjusted odds ratio in a more involved analyses, or HLM in your case. e.g.: Male Female OR Adjusted OR* Outcome1 4/45 5/24 xxx(yyy, zzz) XXX(YYY, ZZZ) Outcome2 etc etc etc etc * Adjusted for aaa, bbb, ccc, ddd Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Maarten buis Sent: 09 April 2010 08:15 To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject: Re: st: Odds ratio --- On Fri, 9/4/10, Rosie Chen wrote: > I am doing HLM analysis, so it is impossible to use the Stata > syntaxt to calculate the predicted probability. So I will > just do the calculation by myself in excel. Here is what I > plan to do: I will calculate log-odds and then convert > them into predicted probabilities for individuals with > characteristics that I am interested in so as to demonstrate > the magnitude of the effect for a specific variable. Sorry for being blunt but that is a very bad idea. There are very good reasons why Stata isn't giving you those probabilities directly: These multilevel models take into account group level variation, while your approach doesn't. > For example, in order to explain the gender difference in the > probability of an outcome, I will compute the difference in > the predicted probability between females and males I am not so negative about odds ratios as others are: Odds ratios and risk differences answer subtly different questions. An effect is a comparison of groups, in your case men and women. That comparison can be made in absolute terms (i.e. compute a difference) or in relative terms (i.e. compute a ratio). Both have their advantages and disadvantages. A discussion of that is given in this paper (if I am allowed some shameless self-promotion): <http://www.maartenbuis.nl/wp/interactions.html>. The key issue with odds ratios is that I would like to have the baseline odds present, to help me interpret the odds ratio (which in a sense helps to bridge the gap between absolute and relative effects). The problem is that by default Stata suppresses those. The trick is to add a variable baseline, which is always one, and add the -noconstant- option. This trick is discussed in the paper I refered to before, and I learned it from: Roger Newson (2003), Stata tip 1: The eform() option of regress. The Stata Journal, 3(4): 445. <http://www.stata-journal.com/article.html?article=st0054> I am slowely getting used to odds, so the distinction between odds and probabilities doesn't bother me any more: You can quantify the likelihood of an event by computing the expected number of success per 100 trials (100*probability) or by the expected number of success per failure (the odds). Just don't mix the two up, as sometimes happens when people try to interpret odds ratios as risk ratios. Hope this helps, Maarten -------------------------- Maarten L. Buis Institut fuer Soziologie Universitaet Tuebingen Wilhelmstrasse 36 72074 Tuebingen Germany http://www.maartenbuis.nl -------------------------- * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**Re: st: Odds ratio***From:*Rosie Chen <jiarongchen2002@yahoo.com>

**Re: st: Odds ratio***From:*Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>

- Prev by Date:
**st: RE: Re: Replacing certain characters in variable labels.** - Next by Date:
**st: Replacing certain characters in variable labels.** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Odds ratio** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Odds ratio** - Index(es):