Hi
I have a doubt with de Relative Risk, using Independent Samples (contingency tables). I was doing a homework and a I found that if a do it manually y got a different result from jamovi. I did a screenshot trying to be explanatory. Can someone tell me why this happed or I'm doing something wrong.
Thanks for any help
Difference in Relative Risk
Difference in Relative Risk
- Attachments
-
- RR Screenshot.png (153.15 KiB) Viewed 3318 times
Re: Difference in Relative Risk
hey,
so these are the calcs we use here:
https://github.com/jamovi/jmv/blob/mast ... #L536-L549
let us know if you still think there's an issue.
kind regards
jonathon
so these are the calcs we use here:
https://github.com/jamovi/jmv/blob/mast ... #L536-L549
let us know if you still think there's an issue.
kind regards
jonathon
Re: Difference in Relative Risk
HI, @Huberth.Can someone tell me why this happed or I'm doing something wrong.
The manual calculation of your RR is correct, but jamovi also correctly calculates RR.
Because RR in jamovi, corresponds to yours, it is necessary that in the first cell (A) the combination of the cases encoded with 1 for rows (fum_cod) is shown with the cases coded with 1 for columns (BP_cod).
From the ribbon Data-> Setup-> Data Variable:
Retrieve your fum_cod variable, in the Levels list select encoding 1 (second line) and with the up arrow move it over (do the same thing with BP_cod).
It's about your output ...
Cheers,
Maurizio
Re: Difference in Relative Risk
[quote="jonathon"]hey,
so these are the calcs we use here:
https://github.com/jamovi/jmv/blob/mast ... #L536-L549
Thank you very much, the formula is ok, its interesting to see the program part of the software
regards
Huberth
so these are the calcs we use here:
https://github.com/jamovi/jmv/blob/mast ... #L536-L549
Thank you very much, the formula is ok, its interesting to see the program part of the software
regards
Huberth
Re: Difference in Relative Risk
MAgojam wrote:HI, @Huberth.Can someone tell me why this happed or I'm doing something wrong.
The manual calculation of your RR is correct, but jamovi also correctly calculates RR.
Because RR in jamovi, corresponds to yours, it is necessary that in the first cell (A) the combination of the cases encoded with 1 for rows (fum_cod) is shown with the cases coded with 1 for columns (BP_cod).
Cheers,
Maurizio
Thanks Maurizio it was very helpful
regards
Huberth