Re: Is this enough information to make an inference?

On Dec 30 2007, 5:34 pm, David Winsemius <doe_s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"michalc...@xxxxxxx" <michalc...@xxxxxxx> wrote innews:50af03db-c506-41ef-a96d-cc7a283f214d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On Dec 29, 9:04 pm, David Winsemius <doe_s...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
then you should check the
spellings underscored (if you read USENET with monospcaced fonts as
is the accepted convention).

Sorry about the misspellings. They are mostly typo's but I should have
used  a spell checker. I am not going to use this as a class exercise
in the foreseeable future. BTW you misspelled mono-spaced ;-)

First Law of the Interent, eh?

Did you get the statistical perspective to answer your questions. At one
point ISTR that you were asking about attributable risk. I don't think
that the Tomsky invocation of Bayes' Theorem actually gives you AR. In
epidemiology there are several terms that are used to describe the excess
risk for condition X associated with exposure Y. Attributable risk and
attributable risk percent are distinct concepts. Are you still looking
for something along those lines?

--
David Winsemius

Yep!

I don't mean to be ungrateful but it kind of amazes me that we are on
message 27 and my questions really haven't been answered yet ;-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is this enough information to make an inference?
    ... spellings underscored (if you read USENET with monospcaced fonts as ... is the accepted convention). ... used  a spell checker. ... point ISTR that you were asking about attributable risk. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: Is this enough information to make an inference?
    ... spellings underscored (if you read USENET with monospcaced fonts as ... is the accepted convention). ... Sorry about the misspellings. ... point ISTR that you were asking about attributable risk. ...
    (sci.stat.math)