Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I understand how an RR works. I also understand that an RR of 1.9 is a lousy RR, and a lot of reputable researchers wouldn't even include it (as I noted).
|
Warning: question.
How can a relative risk be lousy or not? Doesn't any relative risk necessarily have associated with it a confidence interval of some sort that will illuminate how certain that relative risk is?
Threaded Mode