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 *

210 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27936354)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A discussion on significance indices for contingency tables under small sample sizes.
    Oliveira NL; Pereira CAB; Diniz MA; Polpo A
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0199102. PubMed ID: 30071022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. On the efficiency of bootstrap method into the analysis contingency table.
    Amiri S; von Rosen D
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2011 Nov; 104(2):182-7. PubMed ID: 21458876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Exact Bayesian p-values for a test of independence in a 2 × 2 contingency table with missing data.
    Lin Y; Lipsitz SR; Sinha D; Fitzmaurice G; Lipshultz S
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Nov; 27(11):3411-3419. PubMed ID: 28633606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Unconditional versions of several tests commonly used in the analysis of contingency tables.
    Freidlin B
    Biometrics; 1999 Mar; 55(1):264-7. PubMed ID: 11318165
    [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. Testing for marginal independence between two categorical variables with multiple responses.
    Bilder CR; Loughin TM
    Biometrics; 2004 Mar; 60(1):241-8. PubMed ID: 15032795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Testing for independence in J×K contingency tables with complex sample survey data.
    Lipsitz SR; Fitzmaurice GM; Sinha D; Hevelone N; Giovannucci E; Hu JC
    Biometrics; 2015 Sep; 71(3):832-40. PubMed ID: 25762089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Testing spatial symmetry using contingency tables based on nearest neighbor relations.
    Ceyhan E
    ScientificWorldJournal; 2014; 2014():698296. PubMed ID: 24605061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comments on 'Chi-squared and Fisher-Irwin tests of two-by-two tables with small sample recommendations'.
    Martín Andrés A
    Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(10):1791-5; author reply 1795-6. PubMed ID: 18069725
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Power comparison of two-sided exact tests for association in 2 x 2 contingency tables using standard, mid p and randomized test versions.
    Lydersen S; Laake P
    Stat Med; 2003 Dec; 22(24):3859-71. PubMed ID: 14673943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.