Journal of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회지)

The Korean Society of Veterinary Clinics (한국임상수의학회)
권호 표지

Hypothesis Testing: Means and Proportions

평균과 비율 비교

  • Pak, Son-Il (School of Veterianry Medicine and Institute of Veterinary Science, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Lee, Young-Won (College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungnam National University)
  • 박선일 (강원대학교 수의학부대학 및 동물의학종합연구소) ;
  • 이영원 (충남대학교 수의과대학)
  • Published : 2009.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In the previous article in this series we introduced the basic concepts for statistical analysis. The present review introduces hypothesis testing for continuous and categorical data for readers of the veterinary science literature. For the analysis of continuous data, we explained t-test to compare a single mean with a hypothesized value and the difference between two means from two independent samples or between two means arising from paired samples. When the data are categorical variables, the $x^2$ test for association and homogeneity, Fisher's exact test and Yates' continuity correction for small samples, and test for trend, in which at least one of the variables is ordinal is described, together with the worked examples. McNemar test for correlated proportions is also discussed. The topics covered may provide a basic understanding of different approaches for analyzing clinical data.

Keywords

References

  1. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis. New York. NY: Wiley, 1990
  2. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London, England: Chapman & Hall, CRC, 1997
  3. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 3rd edn. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1994
  4. Carlin JB, Doyle LW. Statistics for clinicians. 3: Basic concepts of statistical reasoning: Standard errors and confidence intervals. J Paediatr Child Health 2000; 36: 502-505 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1754.2000.00588.x
  5. Dwyer AJ. Matchmaking and McNemar in the comparison of diagnostic modalities. Radioology 1991; 178: 328-330
  6. Everitt BS. The analysis of contingency tables. 2nd ed. London, UK: Chapman & Hall, 1992
  7. Fisher RA. The logic of inductive inference. J Royal Stat Soc Ser A 1935; 98: 39-54 https://doi.org/10.2307/2342435
  8. Guyatt G, Jaeschke R, Heddle N, Cook D, Shannon H, Walter S. Basic statistics for clinicians: 1. hypothesis testing. Can Med Assoc J 1995; 152: 27-32
  9. Joe H. Extreme probabilities for contingency tables under row and colum independence with applications to Fisher's exact test. Comm Stat A Theory Methods 1988; 17: 3677-3685 https://doi.org/10.1080/03610928808829827
  10. Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC. Essential medical statistics. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd, 2003
  11. Moser BK, Stevens GR. Homogeneity of variance in the twosample means test. Am. Statistician 1992; 46: 19-21 https://doi.org/10.2307/2684403
  12. Mullner M, Matthews H, Altman DG. Reporting on statistical methods to adjust for confounding: a cross-sectional survey. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 122-126
  13. Rosner B. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 4th ed. Boston, Mass: Duxburry, 1995
  14. Yates F. Contingency tables involving small numbers and the ch-square test. J Royal Stat Soc Ser B 1934; (supp 1): 2179-2235
  15. Zou KH, Fielding JR, Silverman SG, Tempany CM. Hypothesis testing I: proportions. Radiology 2003; 226: 609-613 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2263011500