t Test. Abhishek
-
Upload
abhishek2009gwu -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of t Test. Abhishek
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
1/11
A thorough background in craniofacial growth and development is necessary for
every dentist. An important concept in the study of growth & development is
variability. Populations differ in their character, size, growth and shape. These
differences are due to complicated interaction of genetic and enviormental factors.
Indian children do differ from western population groups in physical growth,
maturation, dentition etc, due to factors like morphogenetic pattern and nutritional
status therefore the cephalometric standards for one ethnic and racial group or sub-
group did not necessarily apply to the other ethnic or racial group or sub group.
Rajasthan is the largest state in India and Mewar & Marwar are the two major areas of
it. With the increasing number of children of Rajasthan seeking professional
treatment for malocclusion, it has become apparent that there is need to determine
what constitutes a pleasing or normal face for the chidlren of Rajasthan. A
comprehensive and accurate diagnostic assessment of any orthodontic patient involve
the comparison of the patients cephalometric findings with the norms of his or her
ethnic groups or racial groups or sub groups. Treatment plan and clinical procedure
should not be freely switched without considerations of the racial group involved and
without thorough understanding of the differences between races and their ranges of
normal.
The aim of this study was to
(a) To compare the dentofacial pattern of Mewari children (males & females)
with Marwari children (males & females) using Steiners analysis.
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
2/11
(b) To compare values obtained for Mewari children using Steiners analysis with
the values/ norms given by Steiner for Caucasian population.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
This cephalometric radiographic study was carried out in the Department of
Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Darshan Dental College and Hospital, Udaipur
in association with Jodhpur Dental College and Hospital, Jodhpur.
Source of data
A total of 200 children, 100 from Mewar and 100 from Marwar region of
Rajasthan with equal male and female ratio, between the age group of 11-13 years
were taken for the study from various schools of respective regions. Lateral
cephalogram of all the subjects were taken with an Ortho Ralix 9200, Gendex OPG
machine with a Cephalostat (Dentsply Italia, Italy).
Each cephalogram was placed on an illuminated tracing table, with the profile facing
to the right side. The landmarks and point to be used in the analysis were marked with
lateral cephalogram on acetate tracing paper using sharp 3H pencil. Each landmark
and point was re-checked and then the McNamara & Steiner analysis were done.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The collected data was analyzed statistically using SPSS software, version 10
(SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL).
The mean value and standard deviation of each measurement in both Mewari
and Marwari children were calculated using following formulae:
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
3/11
Mean, .
Standard Deviation, SD = () Independent sample t-test was used to compare measurements of combined
(males & females) Mewari & Marwari children.
Independent sample t-test, || - Mean of group one - Mean of group two SEdStandard error of difference
Student t-test was used to compare measurements of Mewari children with
measurements given by Steiner.
Student t-test,
- Mean of first sample - Mean of unknown population. SE - Standard Error.
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
4/11
Comparison of measurements between Mewari & Marwari children using
Steiners analysis
Parameters 't' value 'p' value
SNA angle 4.36 0.05
SNB angle 3.28 0.05
ANB angle 1.03 NS
Occlusal angle -3.67 .05
Mandibular plane angle 2.59 NS
Maxillary Incisor (angular) 2.46 NS
Maxillary Incisor (mm) 0.31 NS
Mandibular Incisor (angular) 0.82 NS
Mandibular Incisor (mm) 0.97 NS
Inter Incisal angle -1.02 NS
Lower Incisor to Chin (mm) -2.35 NS
Independentt-test (P value 0.05, Significant, Non Significant)
SNA angle-
A significant difference was observed between values of combined (males & females)
Mewari & Marwari children at 4.368 t-value, indicating maxillary protrusion in
Marwari children as compared to Mewari children.
SNB angle
a significant difference between values of combined (males & females) Mewari &
Marwari children at 3.283 t-value, indicating mandibular protrusion in Marwari
children as compared to Mewari children.
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
5/11
Occlusal angle
there was a significant difference between values of combined (males & females)
Mewari & Marwari children at -3.673 t-value (Table 13), indicating more anteriorly
placed occlusal plane in Mewari children as compared to Marwari children.
Comparison of measurements between Mewari children and measurements given
by Steiners
Parameters 't' value 'p' value
SNA angle -3.20 0.01
SNB angle -4.37 0.01
ANB angle 7.60 0.01
Occlusal angle 37.69 .01
Mandibular plane angle -10.31 .01
Maxillary Incisor (angular) 3.81 .01
Mandibular Incisor (mm) 4.66 0.01
Mandibular Incisor (angular) 8.03 0.01
Mandibular Incisor (mm) 6.49 0.01
Inter Incisal angle -8.85 0.01
Lower Incisor to Chin (mm) -16.54 0.01
Studentt-test (P value 0.01, Significant, Non Significant)
SNA angle -
The mean value of SNA angle in the present study was slightly less in Mewari
children i.e. (81.062.93) (Table 1) than those presented by Steiner (822),
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
6/11
indicating retrusion relative to cranial base for Mewari children as compare to those
given by Steiner.
SNB angle
The mean value of SNB angle in the present study was significantly less in Mewarichildren (77.152.52) than those presented by Steiner (802) , indicating
mandibular retrusion relative to cranial base.
ANB angle
ANB angle represents the relative positions of jaw to each other, the mean value of
ANB angles Mewari (3.051.38) children was slightly more than those presented by
Steiner (2), indicating greater convexity.
Occlusal plane angle
Occlusal plane angle shows the relation of occlusal plane to the cranium and face, in
the present study the mean of occlusal plane angle for Mewari (19.73 1.52)
children showed a significant difference than measurements given by Steiner (14).
This indicates more anteriorly placed occlusal plane as compared to those given by
Steiner.
Mandibular plane angle
Mandibular plane angle suggests growth patterns in individuals, the mean values of
this angle for both Mewari (30.361.59) children was slightly less than those
presented by Steiner indicating horizontal growth pattern in Mewari children.
Maxillary incisor position (angular & linear)
Maxillary incisor position represents the relative location and axial inclination of the
upper incisors. In the present study mean value of both angular & linear measurement
for maxillary incisor position of Mewari children were significantly higher than those
presented by Steiner indicating forwardly placed maxillary incisor teeth.
Mandibular incisor position (angular & linear)
Mandibular incisor position represents the relative anteroposterior location &
angulation of the lower incisor teeth. In the present study mean value of both angular
& linear measurement for mandibular incisor position of Mewari children were
significantly higher than those presented by Steiner indicating forwardly placed
mandibular incisor teeth.
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
7/11
Inter incisal angle
Inter incisal angle relates the relative position of the upper incisor to that of the lower
incisors. The mean value of Interincisal angle in present study for Mewari
(123.637.19) children is significantly lower than those given by Steiner, indicating
proclined maxillary & mandibular teeth.
Lower incisor to chin
Lower incisor to chin indicates the prominence of chin when compared with lower
incisors. The mean value of lower incisor to chin in present study for Mewari
(1.71mm1.38mm) children is significantly lesser than those presented by Steiner
(4mm), indicating less prominence of chin to lower incisors for Mewari children as
compared to those given by Steiner.
P values
Definition of a P value
Consider an experiment where you've measured values in two samples, and the means
are different. How sure are you that the population means are different as well? There
are two possibilities:
The populations have different means. The populations have the same mean, and the difference you observed is a
coincidence of random sampling.
The P value is a probability, with a value ranging from zero to one. It is the answer to
this question: If the populations really have the same mean overall, what is the
probability that random sampling would lead to a difference between sample means as
large (or larger) than you observed?
How are P values calculated? There are many methods, and you'll need to read a
statistics text to learn about them. The choice of statistical tests depends on how youexpress the results of an experiment (measurement, survival time, proportion, etc.), on
whether the treatment groups are paired, and on whether you are willing to assume
that measured values follow a Gaussian bell-shaped distribution.
Common misinterpretation of a P value
Many people misunderstand what question a P value answers.
If the P value is 0.03, that means that there is a 3% chance of observing a difference
as large as you observed even if the two population means are identical. It is tempting
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
8/11
to conclude, therefore, that there is a 97% chance that the difference you observed
reflects a real difference between populations and a 3% chance that the difference is
due to chance. Wrong. What you can say is that random sampling from identical
populations would lead to a difference smaller than you observed in 97% of
experiments and larger than you observed in 3% of experiments.
You have to choose. Would you rather believe in a 3% coincidence? Or that the
population means are really different?
"Extremely significant" results
Intuitively, you probably think that P=0.0001 is more statistically significant than
P=0.04. Using strict definitions, this is not correct. Once you have set a threshold P
value for statistical significance, every result is either statistically significant or is not
statistically significant. Some statisticians feel very strongly about this.
Many scientists are not so rigid, and refer to results as being "very significant" or"extremely significant" when the P value is tiny. Often, results are flagged with a
single asterisk when the P value is less than 0.05, with two asterisks when the P value
is less than 0.01, and three asterisks when the P value is less than 0.001. This is not a
firm convention, so you need to check the figure legends when you see asterisks to
find the definitions the author used.
One- vs. two-tail P values
When comparing two groups, you must distinguish between one- and two-tail P
values.
Start with the null hypothesis that the two populations really are the same and that the
observed discrepancy between sample means is due to chance.
The two-tail P value answers this question: Assuming the null hypothesis,what is the chance that randomly selected samples would have means as far
apart as observed in this experiment with either group having the larger mean?
To interpret a one-tail P value, you must predict which group will have thelarger mean before collecting any data. The one-tail P value answers this
question: Assuming the null hypothesis, what is the chance that randomly
selected samples would have means as far apart as observed in this experimentwith the specified group having the larger mean?
A one-tail P value is appropriate only when previous data, physical limitations or
common sense tell you that a difference, if any, can only go in one direction. The
issue is not whether you expect a difference to exist - that is what you are trying to
find out with the experiment. The issue is whether you should interpret increases and
decreases the same.
You should only choose a one-tail P value when you believe the following:
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
9/11
Before collecting any data, you can predict which group will have the largermean (if the means are in fact different).
If the other group ends up with the larger mean, then you should be willing toattribute that difference to chance, no matter how large the difference.
It is usually best to use a two-tail P value for these reasons:
The relationship between P values and confidence intervals is more clear withtwo-tail P values.
Some tests compare three or more groups, which makes the concept of tailsinappropriate (more precisely, the P values have many tails). A two-tail P
value is more consistent with the P values reported by these tests.
Choosing a one-tail P value can pose a dilemma. What would you do if youchose a one-tail P value, but observed a large difference in the opposite
direction to the experimental hypothesis? To be rigorous, you should conclude
that the difference is due to chance, and that the difference is not statistically
significant. But most people would be tempted to switch to a two-tail P valueor to reverse the direction of the experimental hypothesis. You avoid this
situation by always using two-tail P values.
Statistical hypothesis testing
The P value is a fraction. In many situations, the best thing to do is report that number
to summarize the results of a comparison. If you do this, you can totally avoid the
term "statistically significant", which is often misinterpreted.
In other situations, you'll want to make a decision based on a single comparison. In
these situations, follow the steps of statistical hypothesis testing.
1. Set a threshold P value before you do the experiment. Ideally, you should setthis value based on the relative consequences of missing a true difference or
falsely finding a difference. In fact, the threshold value (called alpha) is
traditionally almost always set to 0.05.
2. Define the null hypothesis. If you are comparing two means, the nullhypothesis is that the two populations have the same mean.
3. Do the appropriate statistical test to compute the P value.4. Compare the P value to the preset threshold value. If the P value is less than
the threshold, state that you "reject the null hypothesis" and that the differenceis "statistically significant". If the P value is greater than the threshold, state
that you "do not reject the null hypothesis" and that the difference is "not
statistically significant".
Note that statisticians use the term hypothesis testingvery differently than scientists.
Statistical significance
The termsignificantis seductive, and it is easy to misinterpret it. A result is said to be
statistically significant when the result would be surprising if the populations were
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
10/11
really identical. A result is said to be statistically significant when the P value is less
than a preset threshold value.
It is easy to read far too much into the word significantbecause the statistical use of
the word has a meaning entirely distinct from its usual meaning. Just because a
difference isstatistically significantdoes not mean that it is important or interesting.And a result that is notstatistically significant(in the first experiment) may turn out to
be very important.
If a result is statistically significant, there are two possible explanations:
The populations are identical, so there really is no difference. You happened torandomly obtain larger values in one group and smaller values in the other,
and the difference was large enough to generate a P value less than the
threshold you set. Finding a statistically significant result when the
populations are identical is called making a Type I error.
The populations really are different, so your conclusion is correct.There are also two explanations for a result that is not statistically significant:
The populations are identical, so there really is no difference. Any differenceyou observed in the experiment was a coincidence. Your conclusion of no
significant difference is correct.
The populations really are different, but you missed the difference due to somecombination of small sample size, high variability and bad luck. The
difference in your experiment was not large enough to be statistically
significant. Finding results that are not statistically significant when the
populations are different is called making a Type II error.
Confidence intervals Statistical calculations produce two kinds of results that help you make
inferences about the populations from the samples. You've already learned
about P values. The second kind of result is a confidence interval.
95% confidence interval of a mean Although the calculation is exact, the mean you calculate from a sample is
only an estimate of the population mean. How good is the estimate? It depends
on how large your sample is and how much the values differ from one another.
Statistical calculations combine sample size and variability to generate a
confidence interval for the population mean. You can calculate intervals forany desired degree of confidence, but 95% confidence intervals are used most
commonly. If you assume that your sample is randomly selected from some
population, you can be 95% sure that the confidence interval includes the
population mean. More precisely, if you generate many 95% CI from many
data sets, you expect the CI to include the true population mean in 95% of the
cases and not to include the true mean value in the other 5%. Since you don't
know the population mean, you'll never know for sure whether or not your
confidence interval contains the true mean.
Other situations When comparing groups, calculate the 95% confidence interval for the
difference between the population means. Again interpretation is
-
7/30/2019 t Test. Abhishek
11/11
straightforward. If you accept the assumptions, there is a 95% chance that the
interval you calculate includes the true difference between population means.
Methods exist to compute a 95% confidence interval for any calculatedstatistic, for example the relative risk or the best-fit value in nonlinear
regression. The interpretation is the same in all cases. If you accept the
assumptions of the test, you can be 95% sure that the interval contains the truepopulation value. Or more precisely, if you repeat the experiment many times,
you expect the 95% confidence interval will contain the true population value
in 95% of the experiments.
Why 95%? There is nothing special about 95%. It is just convention that confidence
intervals are usually calculated for 95% confidence. In theory, confidence
intervals can be computed for any degree of confidence. If you want more
confidence, the intervals will be wider. If you are willing to accept less
confidence, the intervals will be narrower.
Conclusion
In the view of the findings of the present study it is evident that, even with so called
well balanced faces, there are some fundamental variations in the craniofacial
structure of children of Mewar region of Rajasthan with Marwar region and also with
measurements given by Steiner . It is thus suggesting that, it may be required to use
separate norms for children of Mewar and Marwar region for orthodontic diagnosis
and treatment planning.