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.
221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21957699)
1. Sample size and power estimates for a confirmatory factor analytic model in exercise and sport: a Monte Carlo approach. Myers ND; Ahn S; Jin Y Res Q Exerc Sport; 2011 Sep; 82(3):412-23. PubMed ID: 21957699 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Proposed modifications to the conceptual model of coaching efficacy and additional validity evidence for the Coaching Efficacy Scale II-High School Teams. Myers N; Feltz D; Chase M Res Q Exerc Sport; 2011 Mar; 82(1):79-88. PubMed ID: 21462688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Sample size and power calculations for medical studies by simulation when closed form expressions are not available. Landau S; Stahl D Stat Methods Med Res; 2013 Jun; 22(3):324-45. PubMed ID: 22491174 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Power calculations for survival analyses via Monte Carlo estimation. Richardson DB Am J Ind Med; 2003 Nov; 44(5):532-9. PubMed ID: 14571517 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Synthesizing single-case studies: a Monte Carlo examination of a three-level meta-analytic model. Owens CM; Ferron JM Behav Res Methods; 2012 Sep; 44(3):795-805. PubMed ID: 22180105 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Accelerating Monte Carlo power studies through parametric power estimation. Ueckert S; Karlsson MO; Hooker AC J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2016 Apr; 43(2):223-34. PubMed ID: 26934878 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A general approach for sample size and power calculations based on the Haseman-Elston method. Hädicke O; Pahlke F; Ziegler A Biom J; 2008 Apr; 50(2):257-69. PubMed ID: 18383449 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Task and Ego Orientation in Sport Questionnaire with cross-validation. Li F; Harmer P; Duncan TE; Duncan SC; Acock A; Yamamoto T Res Q Exerc Sport; 1998 Sep; 69(3):276-83. PubMed ID: 9777664 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Monte Carlo study comparing PIV, ULS and DWLS in the estimation of dichotomous confirmatory factor analysis. Nestler S Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 Feb; 66(1):127-43. PubMed ID: 22524532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. How accurate is the Pearson r-from-Z approximation? A Monte Carlo simulation study. Hittner JB; May K J Gen Psychol; 2012; 139(2):68-77. PubMed ID: 24836910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Simulation sample sizes for Monte Carlo partial EVPI calculations. Oakley JE; Brennan A; Tappenden P; Chilcott J J Health Econ; 2010 May; 29(3):468-77. PubMed ID: 20378190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Monte Carlo approach for change-point detection in the Cox proportional hazards model. Liu M; Lu W; Shao Y Stat Med; 2008 Aug; 27(19):3894-909. PubMed ID: 18254131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sample size determination for assessing equivalence based on proportion ratio under a randomized trial with non-compliance and missing outcomes. Lui KJ; Chang KC Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(1):47-67. PubMed ID: 17708514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Accounting for response misclassification and covariate measurement error improves power and reduces bias in epidemiologic studies. Cheng D; Branscum AJ; Stamey JD Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Jul; 20(7):562-7. PubMed ID: 20538200 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Comparison of calculation methods for diagnostic trials under different sample size]. Wang Y; Hu B; Chen T; Li W Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2010 Dec; 31(12):1403-5. PubMed ID: 21223674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A general approach for sample size and statistical power calculations assessing of interventions using a mixture model in the presence of detection limits. Nie L; Chu H; Cole SR Contemp Clin Trials; 2006 Oct; 27(5):483-91. PubMed ID: 16769254 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effects of sample size on sap flux-based stand-scale transpiration estimates. Kume T; Tsuruta K; Komatsu H; Kumagai T; Higashi N; Shinohara Y; Otsuki K Tree Physiol; 2010 Jan; 30(1):129-38. PubMed ID: 19822581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sample size determination in two-sided distribution-free treatment versus control multiple comparisons. Fan C; Zhang D J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(6):1308-29. PubMed ID: 24138434 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Using Monte Carlo experiments to select meta-analytic estimators. Hong S; Reed WR Res Synth Methods; 2021 Mar; 12(2):192-215. PubMed ID: 33150663 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Recovery of weak factor loadings in confirmatory factor analysis under conditions of model misspecification. Ximénez C Behav Res Methods; 2009 Nov; 41(4):1038-52. PubMed ID: 19897812 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]