1954
DOI: 10.2307/3001616
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some Methods for Strengthening the Common χ 2 Tests

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
1,563
0
52

Year Published

1956
1956
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3,433 publications
(1,662 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
5
1,563
0
52
Order By: Relevance
“…MN staining was performed as described. Statistical significant differences between control and irradiated cells were assessed with the w 2 -test (Cohen, 1960) and significance of dose-dependency with the CochranArmitage test (Cochran, 1954;Armitage, 1955).…”
Section: Micronuclei Assaymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MN staining was performed as described. Statistical significant differences between control and irradiated cells were assessed with the w 2 -test (Cohen, 1960) and significance of dose-dependency with the CochranArmitage test (Cochran, 1954;Armitage, 1955).…”
Section: Micronuclei Assaymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dose-response relationship was evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage trend test (24,25). P-values of less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.…”
Section: Statistical Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Under the null hypothesis of no association and assume HWE in each stratum, using simple algebra we can obtain trueλ^l=Vartrue^H0(trueΔ^l)=(m+1)(1truep^l)2truep^l2/(rlm) where truep^l=[2(r2l+s2l)+(r1l+s1l)]/[2(m+1)rl]. Thus, using the same motivation as the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistic [1,25,26] we can construct the stratified model reduction test (SMRT):…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%