Doctor’s Passport

Find your next topic

Explore the current textbook

Available drafts · Clinical review pending
Membership
Educational draft · awaiting clinical reviewUse Rapid for revision, not patient-care decisions. Check current national and local guidance and the BNF or BNFC before acting.
RapidMLAMRCPMRCGP

Medical statistics

Essential points for quick revision.

Saved on this device

Synopsis

Calculate and interpret core measures of frequency, association, effect and uncertainty, while separating statistical evidence from bias, clinical importance and causal inference.

  • Define the population, unit, time horizon, numerator and denominator before calculating prevalence, risk, rate or an effect measure.
  • Risk ratio compares probabilities; odds ratio compares odds; risk difference gives absolute change; number needed to treat is the reciprocal of a non-zero absolute risk reduction.
  • A confidence interval expresses precision under model assumptions; it is not the probability that this one fixed interval contains the true value.

Reasoning priorities

01
Two-by-two table

Expose event and non-event counts in intervention or exposure and comparison groups.

Calculate risks, odds and absolute differences from the cells; sparse cells create unstable estimates and continuity corrections can materially affect results.

Worked reasoning

Worked exampleCalculate relative and absolute treatment effects

Inputs: over two years, 18 of 300 control participants and 9 of 300 intervention participants experience the outcome; calculate risks, RR, ARR and NNT.

  1. Calculate control risk: 18 divided by 300 equals 0.06, or 6%; intervention risk: 9 divided by 300 equals 0.03, or 3%.
  2. Calculate risk ratio: 0.03 divided by 0.06 equals 0.50, corresponding to a 50% relative risk reduction.
  3. Calculate absolute risk reduction: 0.06 minus 0.03 equals 0.03, or 3 percentage points over two years.
  4. Calculate NNT: one divided by 0.03 equals 33.33, rounded upward to 34 people treated for two years to prevent one additional outcome, assuming the estimate applies.
  5. State outcome with both scales: risk fell from 6% to 3%, RR 0.50, ARR 3 percentage points and NNT 34 over two years; uncertainty requires confidence intervals not supplied here.
  6. Verify with counts: treating 300 people produced nine fewer events, and 300 divided by nine equals 33.33, agreeing with the reciprocal calculation before upward rounding.
Open full textbook Answer 2 questions
Sources and review status4 sources · checked 7 Sept 2026 · clinical review pending
Sources

Sources and review status

National guidance is shown before implementation-dependent detail. Apply principles in context and verify current guidance when a decision affects care. Source check completed 7 Sept 2026; clinical approval remains outstanding.

Authoring stateRapid draftClinical stateAwaiting reviewJurisdictionUnited Kingdom