These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

241 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12434857)

  • 1. Categorical independence tests for large sparse r-way contingency tables.
    Mielke PW; Berry KJ
    Percept Mot Skills; 2002 Oct; 95(2):606-10. PubMed ID: 12434857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Asymptotic log-linear analysis: some cautions concerning sparse frequency tables.
    Mielke PW; Berry KJ; Johnston JE
    Psychol Rep; 2004 Feb; 94(1):19-32. PubMed ID: 15077743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The score test for independence in R x C contingency tables with missing data.
    Lipsitz SR; Fitzmaurice GM
    Biometrics; 1996 Jun; 52(2):751-62. PubMed ID: 8672711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Multiway contingency tables: Monte Carlo resampling probability values for the chi-squared and likelihood-ratio tests.
    Long MA; Berry KJ; Mielke PW
    Psychol Rep; 2010 Oct; 107(2):501-10. PubMed ID: 21117477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of tests of contingency tables.
    Amiri S; Modarres R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2017; 27(5):784-796. PubMed ID: 27936354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Exact and resampling probability values for measures associated with ordered r by c contingency tables.
    Berry KJ; Johnston JE; Mielke PW
    Psychol Rep; 2006 Aug; 99(1):231-8. PubMed ID: 17037473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Chi 2 tests: how useful are they in the analysis of medical research data?
    Osborn JF
    Ann Ig; 1989; 1(3-4):417-32. PubMed ID: 2483622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Biostatistics Series Module 4: Comparing Groups - Categorical Variables.
    Hazra A; Gogtay N
    Indian J Dermatol; 2016; 61(4):385-92. PubMed ID: 27512183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Analysis of 2 x 2 tables of frequencies: matching test to experimental design.
    Ludbrook J
    Int J Epidemiol; 2008 Dec; 37(6):1430-5. PubMed ID: 18710887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations.
    Campbell I
    Stat Med; 2007 Aug; 26(19):3661-75. PubMed ID: 17315184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Two-tailed significance tests for 2 × 2 contingency tables: What is the alternative?
    Prescott RJ
    Stat Med; 2019 Sep; 38(22):4264-4269. PubMed ID: 31264237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The analysis of 2 x 1 and 2 x 2 contingency tables: an historical review.
    Richardson JT
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1994; 3(2):107-33. PubMed ID: 7952428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A revisit to contingency table and tests of independence: bootstrap is preferred to Chi-square approximations as well as Fisher's exact test.
    Lin JJ; Chang CH; Pal N
    J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(3):438-58. PubMed ID: 24905809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How to analyze many contingency tables simultaneously in genetic association studies.
    Dickhaus T; Straßburger K; Schunk D; Morcillo-Suarez C; Illig T; Navarro A
    Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2012 Jul; 11(4):. PubMed ID: 22850061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A measure of effect size for r x c contingency tables.
    Berry KJ; Johnston JE; Mielke PW
    Psychol Rep; 2006 Aug; 99(1):251-6. PubMed ID: 17037476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Exact and asymptotic tests for homogeneity in several 2 x 2 tables.
    Reis IM; Hirji KF; Afifi AA
    Stat Med; 1999 Apr; 18(8):893-906. PubMed ID: 10363329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 2 × 2 Tables: a note on Campbell's recommendation.
    Busing FM; Weaver B; Dubois S
    Stat Med; 2016 Apr; 35(8):1354-8. PubMed ID: 26576745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Limited-information goodness-of-fit testing of item response theory models for sparse 2 tables.
    Cai L; Maydeu-Olivares A; Coffman DL; Thissen D
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2006 May; 59(Pt 1):173-94. PubMed ID: 16709285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. More enlightenment on the essence of applying Fisher's Exact test when testing for statistical significance using small sample data presented in a 2 x 2 table.
    Kangave D
    West Afr J Med; 1992; 11(3):179-84. PubMed ID: 1476961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Analysing 2 × 2 contingency tables: which test is best?
    Ludbrook J
    Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 2013 Mar; 40(3):177-80. PubMed ID: 23294254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.