PakMediNet Discussion Forum : Biostatistics : Can we use Chi-square ?
Can we use Chi-square if the sample size is less than 30 ? If not, then which test would be appropriate ?
Posted by: docosamaPosts: 333 :: 23-08-2002 :: | Reply to this Message
you can get a reply from Prof Moin Ali, DME CPSP karachi,
quote:
docosama wrote:
Can we use Chi-square if the sample size is less than 30 ? If not, then which test would be appropriate ?
Posted by: usman823Posts: 2 :: 25-08-2002 :: | Reply to this Message
It is not this that we cannot use a significance test like chi square on a small sample size, it is just this concept that at a sample size below 30 u dont get a normal distribution, therefore the smaller sample sizes are not useful/reliable/valid. However if u apply this test on a sample of just 2 it will give u the results.
Posted by: ahmedPosts: 19 :: 26-08-2002 :: | Reply to this Message
quote:
docosama wrote:
Can we use Chi-square if the sample size is less than 30 ? If not, then which test would be appropriate ?
Posted by: chameedPosts: 173 :: 26-08-2002 :: | Reply to this Message
Chi Square test can be applied if the sample size is smaller than 30. Chi Square is used for qualitative data.
Chameed is right in advising that when the number od observations in any cell are less than 5, we should use Fisher Exact test. Basically Fisher Exact Test also follows Chi Square Distribution and is considered a derivative of Chi Square.
Posted by: nrehanPosts: 6 :: 30-08-2002 :: | Reply to this Message
Although this thread is quite old , I am writing this response to keep the record straight.
First, although it is generally recommended that one should not use chi-square test if 'expected' frequency in any cell is less than 5, many statisticians consider this too restrictive. Generally, if relatively few expected values are less than 5, a minimum expectation of 1 is allowable in computing chi-square, provided contingency tables are with more than one degree of freedom. (Ref: Cochran. Biometrics 10 (1954) 417-51).
Second, a commonly used method for circumventing thinly populated cells is to combine these thinly populated cells provided they have related treatments or outcomes.
Third, Fisher Exact Test is NOT a derivative of chi-square test and DOES NOT follow chi-square distribution. It is called an 'exact' test because it calculates the exact probability of the outcomes without using any distribution.
[Edited by rqayyum on 02-27-2005 at 05:29 AM GMT]
Posted by: rqayyumPosts: 199 :: 27-02-2005 :: | Reply to this Message
quote:
ROMI wrote:
quote:
docosama wrote:
Can we use Chi-square if the sample size is less than 30 ? If not, then which test would be appropriate ?
Posted by: anwer_khurPosts: 30 :: 01-06-2005 :: | Reply to this Message
I must agree to the most of Anwer's views on the use of these two statisical methods. I think there is no definite criterion not to consider Pearson's chi-square test, if the number of subjects is less than 30. The basic rule or criterion to consider Fischer's exact test is a small value (less than five) in one of the cells in a two by two crosstable. The Fisher's Exact test procedure calculates an exact probability value for the relationship between two dichotomous variables, as found in a two by two crosstable. The program calculates the difference between the data observed and the data expected, considering the given marginal and the assumptions of the model of independence. It works in exactly the same way as the Chi-square test for independence; however, the Chi-square gives only an estimate of the true probability value, an estimate which might not be very accurate if the marginal is very uneven or if there is a small value (less than five) in one of the cells (please note, it is not the total number of subjects/cases/obserations that determines the selction of particular type of statistical method/s). In such cases the Fisher exact test is a better choice than the Chi-square. However, in many cases the Chi-square is preferred because the Fisher exact test is difficult to calculate. I hope the above explanation may have resolved the confusion.
[Edited by honesty on 15-08-2005 at 09:08 AM GMT]
Posted by: honestyPosts: 5 :: 15-08-2005 :: | Reply to this Message