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.
417 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15010353)
1. Ten categories of statistical errors: a guide for research in endocrinology and metabolism. Holmes TH Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab; 2004 Apr; 286(4):E495-501. PubMed ID: 15010353 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis. Ioannidis JP J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):951-7. PubMed ID: 19018930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Publishing nutrition research: a review of sampling, sample size, statistical analysis, and other key elements of manuscript preparation, Part 2. Boushey CJ; Harris J; Bruemmer B; Archer SL J Am Diet Assoc; 2008 Apr; 108(4):679-88. PubMed ID: 18375226 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Statistical conclusion validity and type IV errors in rehabilitation research. Ottenbacher KJ Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 1992 Feb; 73(2):121-5. PubMed ID: 1543405 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The effect of sampling error and measurement error and its correlation on the estimation of multi-locus fixed-bin VNTR RFLP genotype probabilities. Hartmann JM; Houlihan BT; Thompson LD; Chan C; Baldwin RA; Buse EL J Forensic Sci; 1997 Mar; 42(2):241-5. PubMed ID: 9068182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Secondary analysis: theoretical, methodological, and practical considerations. Clarke SP; Cossette S Can J Nurs Res; 2000 Dec; 32(3):109-29. PubMed ID: 11928128 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Estimating the proportion of studies missing for meta-analysis due to publication bias. Formann AK Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Sep; 29(5):732-9. PubMed ID: 18586577 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Statistical conclusion validity: an empirical analysis of multiplicity in mental retardation research. Ottenbacher KJ Am J Ment Retard; 1991 Jan; 95(4):421-7. PubMed ID: 2003911 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The controversy of significance testing: misconceptions and alternatives. Glaser DN Am J Crit Care; 1999 Sep; 8(5):291-6. PubMed ID: 10467465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Interpreting and reporting results. Enarson DA; Kennedy SM; Miller DL; Bakke P Int J Tuberc Lung Dis; 2004 Dec; 8(12):1506-9. PubMed ID: 15636499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How to interpret a meta-analysis and judge its value as a guide for clinical practice. Zlowodzki M; Poolman RW; Kerkhoffs GM; Tornetta P; Bhandari M; Acta Orthop; 2007 Oct; 78(5):598-609. PubMed ID: 17966018 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Hypothesis testing in an errors-in-variables model with heteroscedastic measurement errors. de Castro M; Galea M; Bolfarine H Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(25):5217-34. PubMed ID: 18561290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Estimates of the average strength of natural selection are not inflated by sampling error or publication bias. Knapczyk FN; Conner JK Am Nat; 2007 Oct; 170(4):501-8. PubMed ID: 17891729 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Child factor in measurement dependability. Lampl M; Birch L; Picciano MF; Johnson ML; Frongillo EA Am J Hum Biol; 2001; 13(4):548-57. PubMed ID: 11400226 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Multiplicity and flexibility in clinical trials. Brannath W; Koenig F; Bauer P Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):205-16. PubMed ID: 17674349 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Minimizing mistakes and embracing uncertainty. The PLoS Med; 2005 Aug; 2(8):e272. PubMed ID: 16120013 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Updating meta-analyses leads to larger type I errors than publication bias. Borm GF; Donders AR J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Aug; 62(8):825-830.e10. PubMed ID: 19136233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Methodological issues associated with group intervention research. Murphy SA; Johnson LC Arch Psychiatr Nurs; 2006 Dec; 20(6):276-81. PubMed ID: 17145455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An approach for addressing the multiple testing problem in social policy impact evaluations. Schochet PZ Eval Rev; 2009 Dec; 33(6):539-67. PubMed ID: 19903859 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]