Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Odds Ratio01:09

Odds Ratio

706
The odds ratio (OR) is a statistical measure used extensively in epidemiology and research to quantify the strength of association between exposure and outcome across different groups. Unlike relative risk, which compares the probabilities of an event occurring, the odds ratio compares the odds of an event occurring in the exposed group to the odds of it occurring in the unexposed group. The odds, in this context, are calculated as the probability of the event happening divided by the...
706
Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

340
The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial...
340
Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

885
Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...
885
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

220
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
220
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion01:24

Testing a Claim about Population Proportion

3.5K
A complete procedure for testing a claim about a population proportion is provided here.
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
3.5K
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

8.5K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
8.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Physicians' Views and Agreement about Patient- and Context-Related Factors Influencing ICU Admission Decisions: A Prospective Study.

Journal of clinical medicine·2021
Same author

Evidence of survival benefit was often ambiguous in randomized trials of cancer treatments.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2020
Same author

Patient satisfaction and survey response in 717 hospital surveys in Switzerland: a cross-sectional study.

BMC health services research·2020
Same author

Symptoms of osteoarthritis influence mental and physical health differently before and after joint replacement surgery: A prospective study.

PloS one·2019
Same author

Internists' and intensivists' roles in intensive care admission decisions: a qualitative study.

BMC health services research·2018
Same author

Clinical and radiographic predictors of acute compartment syndrome in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures: a retrospective cohort study.

BMC musculoskeletal disorders·2017

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 7, 2025

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
05:53

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

10.4K

How to use likelihood ratios to interpret evidence from randomized trials.

Thomas V Perneger1

  • 1Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Geneva University Hospitals, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva 1211, Switzerland.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|April 30, 2021
PubMed
Summary

Likelihood ratios provide a straightforward way to quantify evidence supporting competing statistical hypotheses from trial data. This method allows researchers to easily interpret how strongly data supports one hypothesis over another.

Keywords:
Clinical trialsConfidence intervalEvidenceLikelihood ratioP-valueStatistical inference

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.8K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 7, 2025

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry
05:53

Candidate Gene Testing in Clinical Cohort Studies with Multiplexed Genotyping and Mass Spectrometry

Published on: June 21, 2018

10.4K
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.8K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Clinical Trials
  • Statistical Inference

Background:

  • Assessing evidence from clinical trials often involves comparing a new treatment's effectiveness against a null hypothesis.
  • Traditional methods can be complex to interpret for non-statisticians.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To present a simple method for deriving and interpreting likelihood ratios from published clinical trial reports.
  • To demonstrate how likelihood ratios quantify evidence for competing statistical hypotheses.

Main Methods:

  • The likelihood ratio is calculated using the test statistic (z) and the expected value under the alternate hypothesis (A).
  • Values for A and z are derived from sample size calculations and observed treatment effects or confidence intervals.
  • The logarithm of the likelihood ratio is computed as z·A - A²/2.

Main Results:

  • Demonstrated application of likelihood ratios to published trial data, showing examples of strong and moderate evidence for alternate hypotheses.
  • Illustrated a case where the likelihood ratio favored the null hypothesis.
  • Showcased how likelihood ratios update prior beliefs to posterior beliefs.

Conclusions:

  • Likelihood ratios offer a simple, interpretable tool for evaluating evidence in data concerning two competing a priori hypotheses.
  • This method enhances the understanding of statistical evidence in clinical research.