Testing Hypothesis (vaccine)

  • #1
Agent Smith
277
28
TL;DR Summary
Vaccine efficacy hypothesis using a method that may/may not be appropriate
Placebo/control group has 800 people. They aren't given the vaccine. 60 of them develop the disease
Treatment group has 1000 people. They're given the vaccine. 15 develop the disease

It seems there's a formula viz ##\frac{p_1 - p_2}{\sqrt{p (1 - p)}\left(\frac{1}{n_1} + \frac {1}{n_2}\right)}## to do this.

However I tried something different. Would like to know if it's valid.

For ##p_1## = proportion of diseased in unvaccinated and ##p_2## = proportion of diseased in vaccinated, my hypotheses are:
##H_0: p_2 =p_1##
##H_a: p_2 < p_1##

Is this ok?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It is equivalent. Your ##H_0## can be tested by seeing if the above formula is significantly different from 0.
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith
  • #3
@Dale when I do a Chi-square test, my ##\chi^2 \approx 40## for a degree of freedom = 1, that gives a P-value << 0.05,

BUT

when I use the method in the OP, the P-value = 0.0113. It is < 0.05, but not << 0.5.

How come?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
I don’t know. I think they should be the same, but I have to admit that I have not calculated this test by hand in almost 30 years
 
  • Like
Likes Agent Smith
  • #5
Capture.PNG


@Dale can you break the formula down for me? We seem to be "combining" the frequencies with p.
##p = \frac{15 + 60}{1000 + 800}## and then using it compute a standard deviation ##\sqrt {p (1 - p)}##. What does ##\left(\frac{1}{n_1} + \frac{1}{n_2}\right)## do?

A person has assigned values for ##p_1## and ##p_2## as follows:
Capture.PNG


Can I do ##p_1 = 60/800## and ##p_2 = 15/1000##?
 
Last edited:
  • #6
In the original question, it says "variances unknown". What if variances are known? 🤔
All the relevant variances/standard deviations seem computable from givens.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Agent Smith said:
@Dale when I do a Chi-square test, my ##\chi^2 \approx 40## for a degree of freedom = 1, that gives a P-value << 0.05,
This is okay.

Agent Smith said:
BUT

when I use the method in the OP, the P-value = 0.0113. It is < 0.05, but not << 0.5.

How come?
I have got ## 6,3 ## for ## z ## value which gives ## P ## much less than ## 0,05 ##.

Agent Smith said:
View attachment 353603

@Dale can you break the formula down for me? We seem to be "combining" the frequencies with p.
##p = \frac{15 + 60}{1000 + 800}## and then using it compute a standard deviation ##\sqrt {p (1 - p)}##. What does ##\left(\frac{1}{n_1} + \frac{1}{n_2}\right)## do?
## \begin{align}
z&=\frac{p_1-p_2}{\sqrt{p(1-p)(\frac{1}{n_1}+\frac{1}{n_2})}}\nonumber\\
&=\frac{p_1-p_2}{\sqrt{\frac{p(1-p)}{n_1}+\frac{p(1-p)}{n_2}}}\nonumber
\end{align} ##

where $$ \sigma_1^2=\frac{p(1-p)}{n_1} $$ is the first population variance (800 people, 60 of them develop the disease ) and $$ \sigma_2^2=\frac{p(1-p)}{n_2} $$ is the second population variance (1000 people, 15 of them develop the disease).

So ## p_1-p_2 ## has a normal distribution ## \mathcal{N}(0,\sigma_1^2+\sigma_2^2) ##.

Agent Smith said:
A person has assigned values for ##p_1## and ##p_2## as follows:
View attachment 353604

Can I do ##p_1 = 60/800## and ##p_2 = 15/1000##?
Yes you can and now you will have: ## H_0:p_1-p_2=0 ## and ## H_A:p_1-p_2<0 ##. In this case ## z ## value will be ## -6,3 ## and ## P ## will be the same as for the case in the original post.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
213
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
841
Replies
516
Views
31K
Replies
10
Views
431
Back
Top