Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses

Conditional and marginal analyses are widely used in clinical studies. However, the results of these two methods may occasionally contradict each other. For instance, marginal analysis may show that the treatment group outperforms the control group, while conditional analysis may suggest the opposit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Biometrical letters 2024-12, Vol.61 (2), p.137-146
Main Authors: Feng, Chang, Liu, Honghong, Wang, Hongyue, Feng, Changyong
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Conditional analysis
Conditional expectation
Marginal analysis
Simpson’s paradox
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1607-8dfe20fb111680060f1c94ac8b45f089d97f233516f3570cab19144c46f965113
container_end_page 146
container_issue 2
container_start_page 137
container_title Biometrical letters
container_volume 61
creator Feng, Chang
Liu, Honghong
Wang, Hongyue
Feng, Changyong
description Conditional and marginal analyses are widely used in clinical studies. However, the results of these two methods may occasionally contradict each other. For instance, marginal analysis may show that the treatment group outperforms the control group, while conditional analysis may suggest the opposite. We examine the causes of this inconsistency and provide general sufficient conditions for ensuring consistency.
doi_str_mv 10.2478/bile-2024-0009
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3159695635</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3159695635</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1607-8dfe20fb111680060f1c94ac8b45f089d97f233516f3570cab19144c46f965113</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkM1LxDAQxYMouOhePRc8d51JmqQBL7L4sbDgRcFbSNNk6VLbNemy9L83pYIePM2b4b3h8SPkBmFFC1neVU3rcgq0yAFAnZEFRaVyLuXH-R99SZYx7pMDuQBEuSBy09m-i00cXGfHrHLDybkuS7e6GZq-M21mujr7NGHXzItpx-jiNbnwpo1u-TOvyPvT49v6Jd--Pm_WD9vcogCZl7V3FHyFiKIEEODRqsLYsiq4h1LVSnrKGEfhGZdgTYUKi8IWwivBEdkVuZ3_HkL_dXRx0Pv-GFKJqBlyJRQXjCfXanbZ0McYnNeH0KTOo0bQEx898dETHz3xSYH7OXAy7eBC7XbhOCbx-_3_oECKTLJvqcRrPQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3159695635</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Feng, Chang ; Liu, Honghong ; Wang, Hongyue ; Feng, Changyong</creator><creatorcontrib>Feng, Chang ; Liu, Honghong ; Wang, Hongyue ; Feng, Changyong</creatorcontrib><description>Conditional and marginal analyses are widely used in clinical studies. However, the results of these two methods may occasionally contradict each other. For instance, marginal analysis may show that the treatment group outperforms the control group, while conditional analysis may suggest the opposite. We examine the causes of this inconsistency and provide general sufficient conditions for ensuring consistency.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2199-577X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1896-3811</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2199-577X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2478/bile-2024-0009</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Poznan: Sciendo</publisher><subject>Conditional analysis ; Conditional expectation ; Marginal analysis ; Simpson’s paradox</subject><ispartof>Biometrical letters, 2024-12, Vol.61 (2), p.137-146</ispartof><rights>2024. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1607-8dfe20fb111680060f1c94ac8b45f089d97f233516f3570cab19144c46f965113</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/3159695635?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,25731,27901,27902,36989,44566</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Feng, Chang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Honghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Hongyue</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Changyong</creatorcontrib><title>Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses</title><title>Biometrical letters</title><description>Conditional and marginal analyses are widely used in clinical studies. However, the results of these two methods may occasionally contradict each other. For instance, marginal analysis may show that the treatment group outperforms the control group, while conditional analysis may suggest the opposite. We examine the causes of this inconsistency and provide general sufficient conditions for ensuring consistency.</description><subject>Conditional analysis</subject><subject>Conditional expectation</subject><subject>Marginal analysis</subject><subject>Simpson’s paradox</subject><issn>2199-577X</issn><issn>1896-3811</issn><issn>2199-577X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNptkM1LxDAQxYMouOhePRc8d51JmqQBL7L4sbDgRcFbSNNk6VLbNemy9L83pYIePM2b4b3h8SPkBmFFC1neVU3rcgq0yAFAnZEFRaVyLuXH-R99SZYx7pMDuQBEuSBy09m-i00cXGfHrHLDybkuS7e6GZq-M21mujr7NGHXzItpx-jiNbnwpo1u-TOvyPvT49v6Jd--Pm_WD9vcogCZl7V3FHyFiKIEEODRqsLYsiq4h1LVSnrKGEfhGZdgTYUKi8IWwivBEdkVuZ3_HkL_dXRx0Pv-GFKJqBlyJRQXjCfXanbZ0McYnNeH0KTOo0bQEx898dETHz3xSYH7OXAy7eBC7XbhOCbx-_3_oECKTLJvqcRrPQ</recordid><startdate>20241201</startdate><enddate>20241201</enddate><creator>Feng, Chang</creator><creator>Liu, Honghong</creator><creator>Wang, Hongyue</creator><creator>Feng, Changyong</creator><general>Sciendo</general><general>De Gruyter Poland</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241201</creationdate><title>Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses</title><author>Feng, Chang ; Liu, Honghong ; Wang, Hongyue ; Feng, Changyong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1607-8dfe20fb111680060f1c94ac8b45f089d97f233516f3570cab19144c46f965113</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Conditional analysis</topic><topic>Conditional expectation</topic><topic>Marginal analysis</topic><topic>Simpson’s paradox</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Feng, Chang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Honghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Hongyue</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Changyong</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Biometrical letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Feng, Chang</au><au>Liu, Honghong</au><au>Wang, Hongyue</au><au>Feng, Changyong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses</atitle><jtitle>Biometrical letters</jtitle><date>2024-12-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>137</spage><epage>146</epage><pages>137-146</pages><issn>2199-577X</issn><issn>1896-3811</issn><eissn>2199-577X</eissn><abstract>Conditional and marginal analyses are widely used in clinical studies. However, the results of these two methods may occasionally contradict each other. For instance, marginal analysis may show that the treatment group outperforms the control group, while conditional analysis may suggest the opposite. We examine the causes of this inconsistency and provide general sufficient conditions for ensuring consistency.</abstract><cop>Poznan</cop><pub>Sciendo</pub><doi>10.2478/bile-2024-0009</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2199-577X
ispartof Biometrical letters, 2024-12, Vol.61 (2), p.137-146
issn 2199-577X
1896-3811
2199-577X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3159695635
source Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)
subjects Conditional analysis
Conditional expectation
Marginal analysis
Simpson’s paradox
title Inconsistency between conditional and marginal analyses
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T15%3A14%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inconsistency%20between%20conditional%20and%20marginal%20analyses&rft.jtitle=Biometrical%20letters&rft.au=Feng,%20Chang&rft.date=2024-12-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=137&rft.epage=146&rft.pages=137-146&rft.issn=2199-577X&rft.eissn=2199-577X&rft_id=info:doi/10.2478/bile-2024-0009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3159695635%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1607-8dfe20fb111680060f1c94ac8b45f089d97f233516f3570cab19144c46f965113%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3159695635&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true