2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0169-7161(00)18018-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

16 Cochran-mantel-haenszel techniques: Applications involving epidemiologic survey data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The primary efficacy hypothesis was assessed with the use of the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test, with adjustment for the dichotomized baseline NIHSS score, and the weights of the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test were applied in the estimation of the risk difference. 25 At both the interim and the final analyses, an unfavorable outcome (defined as a modified Rankin score of >2) was imputed for participants who had missing data for the primary outcome or for whom data on the primary outcome were obtained outside the specified window. For all analyses of predefined secondary outcomes and subgroup and safety analyses, each test was conducted at a two-sided alpha level of 0.01.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The primary efficacy hypothesis was assessed with the use of the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test, with adjustment for the dichotomized baseline NIHSS score, and the weights of the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test were applied in the estimation of the risk difference. 25 At both the interim and the final analyses, an unfavorable outcome (defined as a modified Rankin score of >2) was imputed for participants who had missing data for the primary outcome or for whom data on the primary outcome were obtained outside the specified window. For all analyses of predefined secondary outcomes and subgroup and safety analyses, each test was conducted at a two-sided alpha level of 0.01.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This paper discusses implementation in R of some newly developed and already well known non-parametric and goodness-of-fit tests and procedures that are utilized in litigations, environmental studies and biostatistics. Besides of the methods discussed in the paper, lawstat contains such procedures as the Brunner-Munzel test, which is also known as the generalized Wilcoxon test (Brunner and Munzel, 2000); the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test (Agresti 2002;Gastwirth 1984;Hall, Woolson, Clarke, and Jones 1999); the Lorenz curve, the coefficient of dispersion and the Gini index (Gastwirth 1988;Bonett and Seier 2008), as well as a number of illustrative data sets from law cases, environmental and archeological studies. We plan to constantly update lawstat with new statistical methods and tests.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although all of these techniques are standard in the context of simple random sampling, the stratified sampling design of the study required that adjustments to these methods be utilized. Although these adjustments were available for most methods, it was necessary to develop methods to compute the CMH adjusted rate differences [63,64]. All programming pertinent to implementation and completion of these goals was completed before June 1996, when final data from the interviews were received.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%