Models for complex contingency tables and polychotomous dosage response curves.

Probability models, in terms of main effect and interaction parameters, are given for the cell frequencies of complex contingency tables. These models, related to the logistic handling of quantal data, are essentially the same ones ordinarily employed by others who have studied such tables. The identification of specific parameters rather than of parametric conditions is intended to facilitate understanding what has been done in the field and to stimulate further research on contingency tables. Parametrization is given alternatively in arithmetric and logarithmic terms, with arithmetic additivity corresponding to unions of events (categories), logarithmic additivity to intersections. An analogous model is presented for the handling of the polychotomous dosage response situation, one in which drug treatment may elicit any of several discrete responses. Slope and intercept parameters are postulated corresponding to each of the several possible responses. Alternative handlings of the polychotomous response problem are discussed and it is brought out that the proposed model, in contrast, gives a unique result without the need for specifying an ordering of response categories. Further, the need for considering certain correlation problems and certain unrealistic consequences arising in multivariate probit models are avoided. In the polychotomous response situation it is brought out that arbitrary combination of response categories is inappropriate, albeit corresponding combinations are permissible in the complex contingency table situation. The implications of this limitation are discussed. Possible extensions of the model, including multiple regression and non-linear regression forms, are mentioned.

[1]  M. W. Birch Maximum Likelihood in Three-Way Contingency Tables , 1963 .

[2]  I. Good Maximum Entropy for Hypothesis Formulation, Especially for Multidimensional Contingency Tables , 1963 .

[3]  B. Woolf ON ESTIMATING THE RELATION BETWEEN BLOOD GROUP AND DISEASE , 1955, Annals of human genetics.

[4]  D. E. Lamphiear,et al.  CALCULATION OF CHI-SQUARE TO TEST THE NO THREE-FACTOR INTERACTION HYPOTHESIS , 1959 .

[5]  H. Bentall,et al.  Relationship Between Cancer of Stomach and the ABO Blood Groups , 1953, British medical journal.

[6]  H. Bentall,et al.  The Blood Groups in Relation to Peptic Ulceration and Carcinoma of Colon, Rectum, Breast, and Bronchus , 1954, British medical journal.

[7]  R. Plackett A Note on Interactions in Contingency Tables , 1962 .

[8]  W. Haenszel,et al.  Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. , 1959, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[9]  Jerome Cornfield,et al.  A Statistical Problem Arising from Retrospective Studies , 1956 .

[10]  Leo A. Goodman,et al.  On Plackett's Test for Contingency Table Interactions , 1963 .

[11]  J. Berkson Maximum Likelihood and Minimum x 2 Estimates of the Logistic Function , 1955 .

[12]  O. Heinisch Finney, D. J.: Statistical method in biological assay. 2. Aufl. Charles Griffin & Cc. Ltd., London 1964. XIX + 668 S., Preis 105 s , 1965 .

[13]  Leo A. Goodman,et al.  Simple Methods for Analyzing Three-Factor Interaction in Contingency Tables , 1964 .

[14]  M. Bartlett Contingency Table Interactions , 1935 .

[15]  L. A. Goodman Interactions in Multidimensional Contingency Tables , 1964 .

[16]  John J. Gart,et al.  On the Combination of Relative Risks , 1962 .

[17]  Leo A. Goodman,et al.  On Methods for Comparing Contingency Tables , 1963 .