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.
5. Sample size estimation in locomotion kinematics and electromyography for statistical parametric mapping. Luciano F; Ruggiero L; Pavei G J Biomech; 2021 Jun; 122():110481. PubMed ID: 33933861 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The probability of false positives in zero-dimensional analyses of one-dimensional kinematic, force and EMG trajectories. Pataky TC; Vanrenterghem J; Robinson MA J Biomech; 2016 Jun; 49(9):1468-1476. PubMed ID: 27067363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Vector field statistical analysis of kinematic and force trajectories. Pataky TC; Robinson MA; Vanrenterghem J J Biomech; 2013 Sep; 46(14):2394-401. PubMed ID: 23948374 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A comparison of random-field-theory and false-discovery-rate inference results in the analysis of registered one-dimensional biomechanical datasets. Naouma H; Pataky TC PeerJ; 2019; 7():e8189. PubMed ID: 31844582 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Two-way ANOVA for scalar trajectories, with experimental evidence of non-phasic interactions. Pataky TC; Vanrenterghem J; Robinson MA J Biomech; 2015 Jan; 48(1):186-9. PubMed ID: 25458576 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. On the validity of statistical parametric mapping for nonuniformly and heterogeneously smooth one-dimensional biomechanical data. Pataky TC; Vanrenterghem J; Robinson MA; Liebl D J Biomech; 2019 Jun; 91():114-123. PubMed ID: 31155212 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Statistical Power in Plant Pathology Research. Gent DH; Esker PD; Kriss AB Phytopathology; 2018 Jan; 108(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 28876210 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. A subject-specific musculoskeletal modeling framework to predict in vivo mechanics of total knee arthroplasty. Marra MA; Vanheule V; Fluit R; Koopman BH; Rasmussen J; Verdonschot N; Andersen MS J Biomech Eng; 2015 Feb; 137(2):020904. PubMed ID: 25429519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. COMAP: a new computational interpretation of human movement planning level based on coordinated minimum angle jerk policies and six universal movement elements. Emadi Andani M; Bahrami F Hum Mov Sci; 2012 Oct; 31(5):1037-55. PubMed ID: 22925477 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Interpreting principal components in biomechanics: representative extremes and single component reconstruction. Brandon SC; Graham RB; Almosnino S; Sadler EM; Stevenson JM; Deluzio KJ J Electromyogr Kinesiol; 2013 Dec; 23(6):1304-10. PubMed ID: 24209874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Power to the People: Power, Negative Results and Sample Size. Gaskill BN; Garner JP J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci; 2020 Jan; 59(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 31852563 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The influence of ligament modelling strategies on the predictive capability of finite element models of the human knee joint. Naghibi Beidokhti H; Janssen D; van de Groes S; Hazrati J; Van den Boogaard T; Verdonschot N J Biomech; 2017 Dec; 65():1-11. PubMed ID: 28917580 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]