<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Large confidence interval in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356331#M18683</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;You've changed the parameterization and the reference levels, so you should expect the estimates and odds ratios will change.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The first call to PROC LOGISTIC implicitly uses PARAM=EFFECT REF=LAST.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The second call uses PARAM=REF REF=FIRST.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Of these two changes, it is probably the REF= option that has the biggest effect on what you are seeing.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;For example, suppose the only covariate is GENDER and the odds ratio for GENDER is 0.5 when REF=LAST. If you change REF=FIRST and rerun, then the new odds ratio is 2.0 &amp;nbsp;(=1/0.5). &amp;nbsp;These two numbers mean exactly the same thing: one gender has twice the odds than the other. &amp;nbsp;The only thing that has changed is if you are comparing females to males or vice versa.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Try using the same parameterization and reference level for each call and report back.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2017 19:42:48 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Rick_SAS</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2017-05-07T19:42:48Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Large confidence interval</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356325#M18682</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi I'm in the process of doing a multiple logistic regression.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm trying to model outcome of an emergency admission using various predictors.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have a mix of categorical and continous explanatory variables. For each of the continous variables I carried out a simple logistic regression beforehand which included just age, gender &amp;amp; the contiuous variable.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;When running the logistic regression for haematocrit, including age and gender, I get a OR (95% CI) of 0.008 (0.002 - 0.040).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-sas"&gt;proc logistic data=predictors;
class gender;
model emerg(event='1')=gender age haematocrit;
run;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, when I run the&amp;nbsp;full model, the confidence interval for this variable becomes very large OR 2.845 (0.084 - 95.841) for this variable. I wonder if anyone can explain this phenomenon? Is this a true effect?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-sas"&gt;proc logistic data=predictors;
class gender smoking alcohol ethnicity no_medication lives_alone bereaved ho_ptca ho_cabg average_glucose_gt200 / param=ref ref=first;
model emerg(event='1')=gender smoking alcohol ethnicity no_medication lives_alone bereaved ho_ptca ho_cabg average_glucose_gt200
age bmi num_deficits num_comorbidites systolic_bp blood_urea_nitrogen creatinine haematocrit;
run;&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2017 11:18:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356325#M18682</guid>
      <dc:creator>Dani08</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-05T11:18:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Large confidence interval</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356331#M18683</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You've changed the parameterization and the reference levels, so you should expect the estimates and odds ratios will change.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The first call to PROC LOGISTIC implicitly uses PARAM=EFFECT REF=LAST.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The second call uses PARAM=REF REF=FIRST.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Of these two changes, it is probably the REF= option that has the biggest effect on what you are seeing.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;For example, suppose the only covariate is GENDER and the odds ratio for GENDER is 0.5 when REF=LAST. If you change REF=FIRST and rerun, then the new odds ratio is 2.0 &amp;nbsp;(=1/0.5). &amp;nbsp;These two numbers mean exactly the same thing: one gender has twice the odds than the other. &amp;nbsp;The only thing that has changed is if you are comparing females to males or vice versa.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Try using the same parameterization and reference level for each call and report back.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 07 May 2017 19:42:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356331#M18683</guid>
      <dc:creator>Rick_SAS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-07T19:42:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Large confidence interval</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356353#M18685</link>
      <description>Hi Rick,&lt;BR /&gt;Sorry I should've thought about it a bit harder before I posted this question. I realised the problem was the unit of the variable. When I changed the units from ratio to percentages, it made the output make sense.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thank you for your help as always!</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2017 13:02:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Large-confidence-interval/m-p/356353#M18685</guid>
      <dc:creator>Dani08</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-05-05T13:02:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

