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 *

229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7952428)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Yates's correction for continuity and the analysis of 2 x 2 contingency tables.
    Haviland MG
    Stat Med; 1990 Apr; 9(4):363-7; discussion 369-83. PubMed ID: 2362976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Chi 2 tests: how useful are they in the analysis of medical research data?
    Osborn JF
    Ann Ig; 1989; 1(3-4):417-32. PubMed ID: 2483622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Yates's correction for continuity and the analysis of 2 x 2 contingency tables.
    Peritz E
    Stat Med; 1992 Apr; 11(6):845-7. PubMed ID: 1510780
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Statistical methods in epidemiology. VII. An overview of the chi2 test for 2 x 2 contingency table analysis.
    Rigby AS
    Disabil Rehabil; 2001 Nov; 23(16):693-7. PubMed ID: 11732558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Resampling techniques in the analysis of non-binormal ROC data.
    Mossman D
    Med Decis Making; 1995; 15(4):358-66. PubMed ID: 8544679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Tests for the homogeneity of two binomial proportions in extremely unbalanced 2 x 2 contingency tables.
    Kang SH; Ahn CW
    Stat Med; 2008 Jun; 27(14):2524-35. PubMed ID: 17847031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Maximally selected chi-square statistics for ordinal variables.
    Boulesteix AL
    Biom J; 2006 Jun; 48(3):451-62. PubMed ID: 16845908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comments on 'Tests for the homogeneity of two binomial proportions in extremely unbalanced 2x2 contingency tables', by S.-H. Kang and C. W. Ahn, Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:2524-2535.
    Martín Andrés A; Herranz Tejedor I
    Stat Med; 2009 Feb; 28(3):528-31. PubMed ID: 19125396
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Analysing 2 × 2 contingency tables: which test is best?
    Ludbrook J
    Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 2013 Mar; 40(3):177-80. PubMed ID: 23294254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Statistical inference on categorical variables.
    Perkins SM
    Methods Mol Biol; 2007; 404():73-88. PubMed ID: 18450046
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.