STATISTICS AND RESEARCH DESIGN

The 2 3 2 tabulation
Nikolaos Pandis, Associate Editor of Statistics and Research Design
Bern, Switzerland, and Corfu, Greece

I
n previous articles, I gave examples of categorical
Table. 2 3 2 table showing the numbers of aligned
data and explained the categories of these data: bi-
and not aligned dentitions per wires A and B and the
nary, ordinal, and nominal.
corresponding estimates as risk difference, risk ratio,
I will deal mainly with binary data in which the
and odds ratio, with 95% confidence intervals
outcome takes only 2 values, such as yes/no or 0/1.
Some examples of binary data include tooth loss (yes/ Wire
no), bracket loss (yes/no), and reaching an event such A B Total
as successful completion of therapy vs no successful Alignment
completion. Yes 23 19 42
Binary data are often presented in a 2-way tabulation No 8 11 19
(2 3 2 table) or a cross-tabulation that displays the rela- Total 31 30 61
tionship between 2 binary variables. Probability/“risk” for 23/31 5 0.74 19/30 5 0.63
We say that there is an association between 2 binary alignment
variables if the distribution of 1 variable varies across the Odds for alignment 23/8 5 2.88 19/11 5 1.73
levels of the other variable. Risk difference 0.11 [5 0.74/0.63]
95% CI: 0.12, 0.34
Risk ratio 1.17 [5 0.74/0.63]
Example 95% CI: 0.83, 1.65
Odds ratio 1.66 [5 2.88/1.73]
Research question: In a clinical trial, 2 types of wires 95% CI: 0.57, 4.87
(A and B) were used for 6 months in 2 patient groups.
This time, we will not measure residual crowding be-
tween the 2 wires (a continuous outcome), but we will compared with wire B. As we have already explained,
use a binary outcome: reaching complete alignment the OR is more extreme compared with the RR, and the
(success) or not reaching complete alignment (failure). RR is easier to understand. However, ORs have better
We will tabulate the frequencies of successes and failures mathematical properties and are often preferred for sta-
for each wire and make some calculations. tistical analyses. When events are rare (\10%), the OR
In 2 3 2 tables, the most frequently applied measures approximates the RR, and they can be used interchange-
of effect are the risk ratio (RR) and the odds ratio (OR) ably. The risk difference is 0.11 or 11%, indicating that
(see previous articles for more details and a review). the absolute difference in alignment is 11% in the per-
The Table presents our data and the calculations of centage of the aligned cases between wire A and wire B.
the risks per wire, as well as the RR and OR, which By using a statistical method, how can we decide
show the relationships between alignment status and whether there is a statistical difference in the probability
wire type. of reaching alignment between the 2 wire types?
According to the Table, the RR and OR are equal to Null hypothesis: the probability/odds of reaching
1.17 and 1.66, respectively. The RR of 1.17 expresses alignment is the same for both wire groups.
that the probability of reaching alignment is 17% higher Alternative hypothesis: the probability/odds of
(or 1.17 times higher) in wire A compared with wire B. reaching alignment is not the same for both wire groups.
The OR of 1.66 denotes that the odds of having align- In the next articles, I will discuss the chi-square test
ment are 66% higher (or 1.66 times higher) in wire A and logistic regression.
Assistant professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics,
School of Dental Medicine/Medical Faculty, University of Bern, Bern,
Switzerland; private practice, Corfu, Greece.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150:715
0889-5406/$36.00
Ó 2016 by the American Association of Orthodontists. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.08.002

715

Downloaded from ClinicalKey.com at Users for NHS Scotland December 01, 2016.
For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2016. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.