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: 32570289)

  • 1. P > .05: The incorrect interpretation of "not significant" results is a significant problem.
    Smith RJ
    Am J Phys Anthropol; 2020 Aug; 172(4):521-527. PubMed ID: 32570289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The continuing misuse of null hypothesis significance testing in biological anthropology.
    Smith RJ
    Am J Phys Anthropol; 2018 May; 166(1):236-245. PubMed ID: 29345299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluating statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminacy using inferential confidence intervals: an integrated alternative method of conducting null hypothesis statistical tests.
    Tryon WW
    Psychol Methods; 2001 Dec; 6(4):371-86. PubMed ID: 11778678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Inappropriate use of statistical power.
    Fraser RA
    Bone Marrow Transplant; 2023 May; 58(5):474-477. PubMed ID: 36869191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Statistics in ophthalmology revisited: the (effect) size matters.
    Grzybowski A; Mianowany M
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2018 Nov; 96(7):e885-e888. PubMed ID: 30187631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Moving Beyond p < 0.05 in Ecotoxicology: A Guide for Practitioners.
    Erickson RA; Rattner BA
    Environ Toxicol Chem; 2020 Sep; 39(9):1657-1669. PubMed ID: 32539165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Error Rates, Decisive Outcomes and Publication Bias with Several Inferential Methods.
    Hopkins WG; Batterham AM
    Sports Med; 2016 Oct; 46(10):1563-73. PubMed ID: 26971328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists.
    Nakagawa S; Cuthill IC
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 2007 Nov; 82(4):591-605. PubMed ID: 17944619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Issues in biomedical statistics: statistical inference.
    Ludbrook J; Dudley H
    Aust N Z J Surg; 1994 Sep; 64(9):630-6. PubMed ID: 8085981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Consequences of relying on statistical significance: Some illustrations.
    Van Calster B; Steyerberg EW; Collins GS; Smits T
    Eur J Clin Invest; 2018 May; 48(5):e12912. PubMed ID: 29438579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bayesian inference of population prevalence.
    Ince RA; Paton AT; Kay JW; Schyns PG
    Elife; 2021 Oct; 10():. PubMed ID: 34612811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. In support of null hypothesis significance testing.
    Mogie M
    Proc Biol Sci; 2004 Feb; 271 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S82-4. PubMed ID: 15101426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Why checking model assumptions using null hypothesis significance tests does not suffice: A plea for plausibility.
    Tijmstra J
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Apr; 25(2):548-559. PubMed ID: 29476482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A logical analysis of null hypothesis significance testing using popular terminology.
    McNulty R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Sep; 22(1):244. PubMed ID: 36123631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Hypothesis testing.
    Yarandi HN
    Clin Nurse Spec; 1996 Jul; 10(4):186-8. PubMed ID: 8900794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Improving Inferences About Null Effects With Bayes Factors and Equivalence Tests.
    Lakens D; McLatchie N; Isager PM; Scheel AM; Dienes Z
    J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci; 2020 Jan; 75(1):45-57. PubMed ID: 29878211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives.
    Brookes ST; Whitley E; Peters TJ; Mulheran PA; Egger M; Davey Smith G
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(33):1-56. PubMed ID: 11701102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Equivalence versus classical statistical tests in water quality assessments.
    Ngatia M; Gonzalez D; San Julian S; Conner A
    J Environ Monit; 2010 Jan; 12(1):172-7. PubMed ID: 20082011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.