<?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: Relative Risk for Small Sample in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530106#M26759</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:07:12 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>taishayla</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-01-25T16:07:12Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Relative Risk for Small Sample</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530098#M26757</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Any suggestions for which procedure to use for relative risk in which the sample size is small and two-by-two table has 0 values? My table, top to bottom/left to right: 10/0/1/3. I've used the relrisk option with proc freq. Wasn't sure if it may be best to use the logistic model and if the firth option would best handle this. Suggestions are welcomed!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:44:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530098#M26757</guid>
      <dc:creator>taishayla</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-25T15:44:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Relative Risk for Small Sample</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530103#M26758</link>
      <description>PROC FREQ with the EXACT options specified?</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:59:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530103#M26758</guid>
      <dc:creator>Reeza</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-25T15:59:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Relative Risk for Small Sample</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530106#M26759</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Yes&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 16:07:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530106#M26759</guid>
      <dc:creator>taishayla</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-25T16:07:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Relative Risk for Small Sample</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530171#M26761</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;The results from EXACT RELRISK; in PROC FREQ are what you want. That provides exact results. The Firth method is not an exact method - it just uses a penalized likelihood.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 19:14:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Relative-Risk-for-Small-Sample/m-p/530171#M26761</guid>
      <dc:creator>StatDave</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-01-25T19:14:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

