Janessa Benson

2022-10-07

Probability of infection by staphylococcus aureus

Please forgive my innumeracy, but I have a question with which I am hoping someone might be able to help me.

Suppose the following be true. The chance of a prosthetic hip joint becoming infected by staphylococcus aureus is one per cent. The chance of a natural hip joint becoming infected by staphylococcus aureus is 0.1%. In other words (in case I am misusing the word 'chance'), one in one hundred people with prosthetic hip joints will become infected by staphylococcus aureus, whereas only one in one thousand people with natural hip joints will become so infected.

Now suppose that X has a prosthetic hip joint and that X's hip joint becomes infected by staphylococcus aureus.

Given only the information provided here, is it correct to say that X's hip joint probably would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint (instead of a natural hip joint)? In other words (to make it clear what I mean by 'probably'), is it correct to say that there is a greater than 50 per cent chance that X's hip joint would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint? Why or why not?

Please forgive my innumeracy, but I have a question with which I am hoping someone might be able to help me.

Suppose the following be true. The chance of a prosthetic hip joint becoming infected by staphylococcus aureus is one per cent. The chance of a natural hip joint becoming infected by staphylococcus aureus is 0.1%. In other words (in case I am misusing the word 'chance'), one in one hundred people with prosthetic hip joints will become infected by staphylococcus aureus, whereas only one in one thousand people with natural hip joints will become so infected.

Now suppose that X has a prosthetic hip joint and that X's hip joint becomes infected by staphylococcus aureus.

Given only the information provided here, is it correct to say that X's hip joint probably would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint (instead of a natural hip joint)? In other words (to make it clear what I mean by 'probably'), is it correct to say that there is a greater than 50 per cent chance that X's hip joint would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint? Why or why not?

Marshall Horne

Beginner2022-10-08Added 8 answers

It is tempting to think of the cases where infection and prosthetic hip joints occur as a superset of the cases where natural hip joints contract the infection. This way we could reach a result that "Only 10% of prosthetic hip joint infections would have been infected with a natural hip joint" but this is not a valid conclusion. The two groups aren't directly comparable. We'd need some data about the correlation of these percentages, which is impossible to acquire because we can't simulate alternate universes where person X who has a prosthetic hip joint doesn't have the prosthetic hip joint.

Even if we could correlate the percentages of people that get a staphylococcus aureus infection in either group, the statement "X's hip joint probably would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint" implies a causal link. We know that correlation doesn't imply causation.

In fact, given that X was any other person with a prosthetic hip joint, they would probably not have acquired the hip joint infection. The probabilities in this case work out similarly.

Even if we could correlate the percentages of people that get a staphylococcus aureus infection in either group, the statement "X's hip joint probably would not have become infected but for the fact that X has a prosthetic hip joint" implies a causal link. We know that correlation doesn't imply causation.

In fact, given that X was any other person with a prosthetic hip joint, they would probably not have acquired the hip joint infection. The probabilities in this case work out similarly.

Which of the following statements is not correct for the relation R defined by aRb, if and only if b lives within one kilometre from a?

A) R is reflexive

B) R is symmetric

C) R is not anti-symmetric

D) None of the aboveA line segment is a part of a line as well as a ray. True or False

Which characteristic of a data set makes a linear regression model unreasonable?

Find the meaning of 'Sxx' and 'Sxy' in simple linear regression

In the least-squares regression line, the desired sum of the errors (residuals) should be

a) zero

b) positive

c) 1

d) negative

e) maximizedCan the original function be derived from its ${k}^{th}$ order Taylor polynomial?

Should the independent (or dependent) variables in a linear regression model be normal or just the residual?

What is the relationship between the correlation of two variables and their covariance?

What kind of technique is to be adopted if I have to find an equation or model for say, $D$ depends on $C$, $C$ changes for a set of $B$, which changes for different $A$.

Correlation bound

Let x and y be two random variables such that:

Corr(x,y) = b, where Corr(x,y) represents correlation between x and y, b is a scalar number in range of [-1, 1]. Let y' be an estimation of y. An example could be y'=y+(rand(0,1)-0.5)*.1, rand(0,1) gives random number between 0, 1. I am adding some noise to the data.

My questions are:

Is there a way where I can bound the correlation between x, y' i.e. Corr(x,y')?I mentioned y' in light of random perturbation, I would like to know what if I don't have that information, where I only know that y' is a estimation of y. Are there any literature that cover it?What is the benefit of OU vs regression for modeling data, say data in the form of ($x,y$) pairs?

Can you determine the correlation coefficient from the coefficient of determination?

How can one find the root of sesquilinear form with positive definite matrix?

From numerical simulation and regression analysis I discovered that the root-mean-square amplitude of white noise with bandwidth $\mathrm{\Delta}\phantom{\rule{negativethinmathspace}{0ex}}f$ is proportional to $\sqrt{\phantom{\rule{negativethinmathspace}{0ex}}\mathrm{\Delta}\phantom{\rule{negativethinmathspace}{0ex}}f}$. How can this be derived mathematically ?

In a Simple Linear Regression analysis, independent variable is weekly income and dependent variable is weekly consumption expenditure. Here $95$% confidence interval of regression coefficient, ${\beta}_{1}$ is $(.4268,.5914)$.