4 ms·
With an 95% confidence interval which doesn’t include zero, doesn’t it mean that it’s statistically significant? Assuming data is valid and unbiased of course
by jtaft 3y ago
With an 95% confidence interval which doesn’t include zero, doesn’t it mean that it’s statistically significant?
Assuming data is valid and unbiased of course.
Not a statistician, just curious.
- wxnx 3y agoNope, you're thinking of regression coefficients, where you'd be correct that usually the null hypothesis is $\beta = 0$. In this case, what's being reported are odds ratios, so the null hypothesis would be that OR = 1. The parent comment's point is that although the reported effect is significant at $\alpha = 0.05$ (the usual "95% CI" you mentioned), there are other problems that render their test of this hypothesis less than valid.
- jtaft 3y agoAh thank you, had to read up on odds ratio. edit for those curious about odds ratio https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK431098/#:~:text=The%20odds%20ratio%20is%20the,to%20be%20found%20with%20exposure https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK431098/#:~:text=The%20....
- jaggederest 3y agoFor odds ratio, you're looking for > 1.0, as 1.0 implies "the usual odds" i.e. the null hypothesis.
- bogeholm 3y ago> With an 95% confidence interval which doesn’t include zero, doesn’t it mean that it’s statistically significant? That’s explained here: https://xkcd.com/882/ https://xkcd.com/882/