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

Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

267
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...
267
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

241
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
241
Group Design02:01

Group Design

9.0K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
9.0K
Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks01:21

Friedman Two-way Analysis of Variance by Ranks

268
Friedman's Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks is a nonparametric test designed to identify differences across multiple test attempts when traditional assumptions of normality and equal variances do not apply. Unlike conventional ANOVA, which requires normally distributed data with equal variances, Friedman's test is ideal for ordinal or non-normally distributed data, making it particularly useful for analyzing dependent samples, such as matched subjects over time or repeated measures...
268
One-Way ANOVA: Equal Sample Sizes01:15

One-Way ANOVA: Equal Sample Sizes

3.4K
One-Way ANOVA can be performed on three or more samples with equal or unequal sample sizes. When one-way ANOVA is performed on two datasets with samples of equal sizes, it can be easily observed that the computed F statistic is highly sensitive to the sample mean.
Different sample means can result in different values for the variance estimate: variance between samples. This is because the variance between samples is calculated as the product of the sample size and the variance between the...
3.4K
Review and Preview01:10

Review and Preview

7.7K
In statistics, several tools are used to interpret the data. Measures of central tendency represent the characteristics of the data, such as mean, median, and mode. Additionally, measures of variance like standard deviation and range are used to find the spread of data from the mean. Relative standing measures the distance between data locations. Commonly used measures of relative standings are percentile, z score, and quartiles.
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
7.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Investigating the replicability of the social and behavioural sciences.

Nature·2026
Same author

Harms of Antenatal Corticosteroids Among Infants Born at Term: Cause for Concern or Caused by Bias?

Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica·2026
Same author

Timing of birth to improve outcomes in chronic or gestational hypertension: the WILL RCT.

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)·2026
Same author

Rethinking Maternal Obesity Research in a Changing Clinical Landscape.

Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology·2025
Same author

Inequalities in preterm birth among immigrants to Canada by race and time since immigration: A population-based repeated cross-sectional study.

International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics·2025
Same author

Effects of Outdoor and Household Air Pollution on Hand Grip Strength in a Longitudinal Study of Rural Beijing Adults.

International journal of environmental research and public health·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 8, 2025

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.0K

Subgroup effects should be examined using both relative and absolute effect measures.

Peter Socha1, Sam Harper1, Jennifer A Hutcheon2

  • 1Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
|March 2, 2023
PubMed
Summary

Understanding treatment effects requires considering both relative and absolute scales. Comparing these scales is crucial for accurately identifying meaningful subgroup differences in clinical research.

Keywords:
corticosteroidepidemiologypreterm birthrelative riskstatistics

More Related Videos

Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits
08:27

Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits

Published on: September 27, 2019

7.0K
Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design
07:40

Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design

Published on: May 31, 2021

3.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 8, 2025

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.0K
Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits
08:27

Applying an eMASS Customization Program as a Research Tool to Evaluate Consumer Benefits

Published on: September 27, 2019

7.0K
Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design
07:40

Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design

Published on: May 31, 2021

3.4K

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Clinical Epidemiology
  • Medical Research Methodology

Background:

  • Treatment effects are often reported using relative measures like risk ratios or odds ratios.
  • Absolute measures of treatment effect, such as risk differences, provide complementary information.
  • Subgroup analyses are critical for understanding treatment heterogeneity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the importance of considering both relative and absolute scales when evaluating treatment effects across subgroups.
  • To demonstrate how conclusions about subgroup differences can change based on the scale used.
  • To advocate for the simultaneous reporting and comparison of relative and absolute treatment effects.

Main Methods:

  • Illustrative examples from existing literature were used to demonstrate the concepts.
  • Comparison of treatment effect conclusions based on relative versus absolute scales.
  • Analysis of how baseline risk differences between subgroups influence effect estimates on different scales.

Main Results:

  • When baseline risks differ between subgroups, treatment effects will vary on at least one scale (relative, absolute, or both).
  • Analysis of literature examples showed that conclusions regarding subgroup differences could differ if absolute effects were considered alongside relative effects.
  • Exclusive reliance on relative effects may obscure important subgroup variations.

Conclusions:

  • Researchers and clinicians must consider both relative and absolute scales to fully identify meaningful subgroup differences.
  • A comprehensive understanding of treatment effects necessitates evaluating effects on both the relative and absolute scales.
  • Comparing effects across multiple scales provides a more robust assessment of treatment heterogeneity.