Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 2 Subgroups analysis for potential causal relationships

From: Investigation of the causal relationship between patient portal utilization and patient’s self-care self-efficacy and satisfaction in care among patients with cancer

Outcomec – Quality of Care

Test Aa

Test B b

Subgroups

Pooled P value

Effect size

Pooled P value

Effect size

Gender

 Female

.17

.12

.02

.15

 Male

.28

.13

.16

.14

Education

 equivalent or lower than college graduates

.01

.15

.06

.14

 graduate or postgraduate

.76

.10

.12

.15

  1. aRejecting Test A is necessary for the reverse causal relationship
  2. bRejecting Test B is necessary for the expected causal relationship
  3. cFailing to reject Test A but rejecting Test B indicates existence of the expected causal relationship between the treatment and the outcome; the opposite indicates the reverse causal relationship. Rejecting both tests indicates existence of heterogenous causal relationships
Back to article page

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

ISSN: 1472-6947

Contact us