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.
133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24254185)
1. Sample size for monitoring of toxic chemical sites. Alldredge JR Environ Monit Assess; 1987 Sep; 9(2):143-54. PubMed ID: 24254185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Significance, Errors, Power, and Sample Size: The Blocking and Tackling of Statistics. Mascha EJ; Vetter TR Anesth Analg; 2018 Feb; 126(2):691-698. PubMed ID: 29346210 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Negative consequences of using α = 0.05 for environmental monitoring decisions: a case study from a decade of Canada's Environmental Effects Monitoring Program. Mudge JF; Barrett TJ; Munkittrick KR; Houlahan JE Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Sep; 46(17):9249-55. PubMed ID: 22873710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biostatistics Series Module 5: Determining Sample Size. Hazra A; Gogtay N Indian J Dermatol; 2016; 61(5):496-504. PubMed ID: 27688437 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sources, pathways, and relative risks of contaminants in surface water and groundwater: a perspective prepared for the Walkerton inquiry. Ritter L; Solomon K; Sibley P; Hall K; Keen P; Mattu G; Linton B J Toxicol Environ Health A; 2002 Jan; 65(1):1-142. PubMed ID: 11809004 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The implementation of medical monitoring programs following potentially hazardous exposures: a medico-legal perspective. Vearrier D; Greenberg MI Clin Toxicol (Phila); 2017 Nov; 55(9):956-969. PubMed ID: 28644057 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A probabilistic approach to the construction of competing-risk life tables. Hsieh JJ Biom J; 1989; 31(3):339-57. PubMed ID: 12282507 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Setting an optimal α that minimizes errors in null hypothesis significance tests. Mudge JF; Baker LF; Edge CB; Houlahan JE PLoS One; 2012; 7(2):e32734. PubMed ID: 22389720 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Computing asymptotic power and sample size for case-control genetic association studies in the presence of phenotype and/or genotype misclassification errors. Ji F; Yang Y; Haynes C; Finch SJ; Gordon D Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol; 2005; 4():Article37. PubMed ID: 16646856 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Formulas for threshold computations. Robert C; Vermont J; Bosson JL; François P; Demongeot J Comput Biomed Res; 1991 Dec; 24(6):514-29. PubMed ID: 1769229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Formulas and tables for the determination of sample sizes and power in clinical trials for testing differences in proportions for the matched pair design: a review. Sahai H; Khurshid A Fundam Clin Pharmacol; 1996; 10(6):554-63. PubMed ID: 8985726 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Approximate sample size formulas for the two-sample trimmed mean test with unequal variances. Luh WM; Guo JH Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2007 May; 60(Pt 1):137-46. PubMed ID: 17535584 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks. Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The use of restricted mean time lost under competing risks data. Lyu J; Hou Y; Chen Z BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Jul; 20(1):197. PubMed ID: 32711456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Type-II generalized family-wise error rate formulas with application to sample size determination. Delorme P; de Micheaux PL; Liquet B; Riou J Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(16):2687-714. PubMed ID: 26914402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. On the power of the Cochran-Armitage test for trend in the presence of misclassification. Buonaccorsi JP; Laake P; Veierød MB Stat Methods Med Res; 2014 Jun; 23(3):218-43. PubMed ID: 21878460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Test procedure and sample size determination for a proportion study using a double-sampling scheme with two fallible classifiers. Qiu SF; Zeng XS; Tang ML; Poon WY Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Apr; 28(4):1019-1043. PubMed ID: 29233082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Statistical reasoning in clinical trials: hypothesis testing. Kelen GD; Brown CG; Ashton J Am J Emerg Med; 1988 Jan; 6(1):52-61. PubMed ID: 3275456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]