Title: An Idiots Guide to Statistics Curriculum 3.6
1An Idiots Guide to StatisticsCurriculum 3.6
- Daisy de Ferranti
- Stephanie de Giorgio
- Lindo Van der Merwe
2(No Transcript)
3Overview
- Why bore you with Statistics
- Definitions
- How to work through the stats questions
4Why bore you with Statistics
- AKT- Definitions, interpretation of terms, 2 by 2
table (and forest plot for statisticians!)
5Present Absent
Positive a b
Negative c d
6Present Absent
Positive True positive False positive
Negative False negative True negative
7Definitions
- Sensitivity (True positive rate) How good is
this test at picking up people who have the
condition? - a/ac
8Specificity
- True negative rate
- How good is this test at correctly excuding
people without the condition - d/bd
9Positive Predictive value
- Post test probability of a positive test
- If a person tests positive, what is the
probability that he has the condition - a/ab
10Negative predictive value
- Post test probability of a negative test
- If a person tests negative what is the probabilty
that he does not have the condition - d/cd
11How to remember this!
- SnNOUT with high sensitivity a negative result
rules OUT the diagnosis - SpPin with high specificity, a positive result
rules IN the diagnosis
12An example
Gastric cancer Gastric cancer Gastric cancer Gastric cancer
Blood result Present Absent
Blood result Positive 20 30
Blood result Negative 5 45
13- Sensitivity
- 20/25 0.8
- Specificity
- 45/75 0.6
- PPV
- 20/50 0.4
- NPV
- 45/50 0.9
14Accuracy
- What proportion of all tests have given the
correct result (ie true positives and true
negatives as a proportion of all the results) - ad/abcd
15Likelihood ratio of a positive test
- How much more likely is positive test to be found
in a person with, as opposed to without, the
condition - Sensitivity/1-specificity
16Interventions
Dead Alive Total no
Control 404 a 921 b 1324 ab
Surgical 350 c 974 d 1325 cd
17Risk
- Chance of being dead in control group
- X
- Chance of being dead in surgical group
- Y
18Relative Risk
- RR of death is the risk in surgical pts compared
with controls. - y/x
19Relative risk reduction
- Amount by which the risk of death is reduced by
surgery
20Another practical example treatment of candida
Improved Not improved Total no
Antifungal 80 20 100
Placebo 60 40 100
21- Risk in placebo group 40/1000.440
- Risk in treatment group 20/1000.220
- Absolute risk reduction (ARR)
- 80/100 60/100 20
- Relative risk reduction
- Risk in placebo (40) risk in treatment(20)
0.5 - Risk in placebo (40)
22Glossary Index
23Hierarchy of Evidence
- Systematic review meta-analysis
- RCT
- Cohort studies
- Case-control studies
- Cross-sectional surveys
- Case reports
24Types of Study
- Case control
- Retrospective
- Group of cases with condition group of controls
without are studied to determine relative
frequency of particular exposures of interest in
2 groups - Concerned with aetiology of disease rather than
Rx - Cohort
- Prospective
- Two groups of people are selected on basis of
differences in their exposure to particular agent
followed up to establish how many in each group
develop a particular disease - Follow up period generally years
- Concerned with aetiology of disease
25Types of Study
- 1. Case reports
- Describes medical hx of single pt in form of
story. - 2. Cross-sectional surveys
- Population or sample of population examined to
determine prevalence of certain condition
26Types of Study
- 5. RCT
- Participants in trial are randomly allocated to
either one intervention (ie drug) or another (ie
placebo) - Both groups followed up for specified time
analysed in terms of specific outcomes defined at
onset (ie death, MI) - Often short follow up due to costs pressure to
produce timely evidence - 6. Systematic Reviews Meta-analysis
- Systematic review Summary of medical literature
that uses explicit methods to perform a thorough
search critical appraisal of individual studies
- Meta-analysis A systematic review that uses
quantitative methods to summarise results
pooling all information from number of different
(but similar) studies
27Statistics which describe Data
- Mean
- Median
- Mode
- Standard Deviation
28- Mean
- Sum of all values, divided by the number of
values - Used in normal distribution spread of data is
fairly similar on each side of mid point
29- Median
- It is the point which has half the values above
half below - Used to represent average when data not
symmetrical - skewed distribution - Meanmedian in symmetrical distribution but not
in skew distribution - Mode
- Most common set of events
30- Standard
Deviation - Good news not necessary to know how to
calculate the SD! - Used for data which is normally distributed
- SD indicates how much a set of values is spread
around the mean - /- 1 SD (range of one SD above below the mean)
includes 68.2 of the values - /- 2 SD includes 95.4 of values
- /- 3 SD includes 99.7
31Statistics which test confidence
- P value
- Confidence interval
32P value
- Test of probability ie any observed difference
having happened by chance - Used to determine whether a hypothesis is true
- Null hypothesis no difference between two
groups/treatments - P value lt0.05 statistically significant ie
unlikely to have happened by chance, hence
important - The lower the p value, the less likely the
difference happened by chance thus the higher
the significance - Significant p rejects Null hypothesis
33Confidence interval
- When is it used?
- Typically when, instead of simply wanting mean
value of sample, we want a range that is likely
to contain the true population value - True value is mean value that we would get if
we had data for the whole population - What does it mean?
- CI gives the range in which the true value is
likely to be (usually with level of 95
certainty) - Provides same information as p value, but more
useful - Size of CI related to sample size of study
larger studies have narrower CI - If CI crosses 0 Null hypothesis true
34Forest Plot/blobbogram
35Forest Plot
- Allows readers to see information from individual
studies that went into the meta-analysis at a
glance - Results of component studies are shown as squares
centred on point estimate of result of each study - Horizontal line runs through to show its CI
- Diamond symbol represents the overall estimate
from meta-analysis and its CI - Significance is achieved if the diamond is clear
of the line of no effect
36- Interpretation
- i. Wide CI, crosses 0
- ii. Does not cross 0, intervention works but weak
evidence - iii. Narrow CI, crosses 0, intervention no
benefit - iv. Narrow CI, intervention works
- v. Intervention detrimental
- vi. Meta-analysis intervention works
37Key definitions
- Incidence proportion of a defined group
developing a disease within a stated period - Prevalence proportion of a defined group having
a disease at any one time - Single blinded subjects did not know which
treatment they were receiving - Double blinded neither investigators nor
subjects knew who was receiving which treatment - Unblinded all participants were aware of who
received which intervention - Power ability of a study to minimise
uncertainties that arise because of chance
variation between samples - ie larger samples - Type II error common accept null when
alternative is true - Type I error less common accept alternative
when null is true
38Enough of the theory heres the practical bit!!
- What do we need to be able to do?
- 1. Interpret drug rep data
- 2. Explain risk/benefits to our patients
- 3. Understand evidenced based medicine
39Survival analysis and risk reduction
- Use of ramipril in preventing stroke double
blind randomised trial. BMJ 324699-702 - To determine the effect of ramipril on secondary
prevention of stroke. - 267 hospitals in 19 countries
- 9297 patients with vascular disease or diabetes
followed for 4.5 yrs (HOPE study)
40- Outcome stroke, TIA and cognitive function
measured. Blood pressure recorded at entry to
study, after 2 years and at end. - Results
- Reduction in BP modest
- Relative risk of stroke reduced by 31 in
ramipril group compared to placebo, relative risk
of fatal stroke reduced by 61
41Summary of results
Stroke No-stroke Total
Ramipril 156 (Fatal 17) 4479 4635
Placebo 226 (Fatal 44) 4426 4652
42- Risk of stroke in ramipril group
- 156/4635 0.036 3.36
- Risk of stroke in placebo group
- 226/4652 0.048 4.48
- Relative risk reduction (4.86 3.36)/4.86
- 0.31
- 31
43- Absolute risk reduction (ARR)
- Risk in placebo risk in rampril
- 4.86 3.36 1.5
- NNT 100 100 67
- ARR 1.5
44- For fatal stroke
- Risk in ramipril group 17/4635 0.0036
- Risk in placebo group - 44/4652 0.0094
- RRR 0.0094 - 0.0036 0.617 61
- 0.0094
45- Rampril reduced risk of stroke in high risk
patients by 31, which seems good. - However, have to treat 67 people for 4 ½ years in
order to benefit 1 patient by preventing 1 stroke
46Odds ratios and CI
- Systematic r/v of long term anticoagulation or
antiplatelet treatment in pts with atrial
fibrillation BMJ 322321-326 - Objective - to examine benefits/risks of warfarin
compared to aspirin/indomethacin - Methods - meta-analysis of RCT. Odds ratios (95
CI) calculated to estimate treatment effects
47(No Transcript)
48Results for one of the trials
Odds of vascular death in patients on
warfarin number of times an event happens
16 0.088 number of times it does not happen
197-16 Odds of vascular death in aspirin pts
14 0.080
188 - 14
Odds ratio odds in warfarin pts 0.088
1.10 odds in aspirin pts
0.080 Odds ratio of gt1 indicates that rate of
vasc death increased in warfarin pts over those
in aspirin pts.
49- If the confidence interval for the Odds Ratio
containes 1 ie no difference, then the difference
in results is NOT statistically significant - Seen by CI plot line crossing the line at 1.
- Overall the study did not show any benefit of
long term anticoagulation and an increased risk
of bleeding
50In summary
- Important to understand for career, not just for
exam. - Try to understand basic concepts well as can then
apply to most questions.