Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 342

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why Permutation Tests are Superior to t and F Tests in Biomedical Research

Ludbrook, John, Dudley, Hugh·1998·The American Statistician
DOI 10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A survey of 252 prospective, comparative studies reported in five, frequently cited biomedical journals revealed that experimental groups were constructed by randomization in 96% of cases and by random sampling in only 4%. The median group sizes ranged from 4 to 12. In the randomized studies in which measurements were made on a continuous scale, comparisons of location were made by t or F tests in 84% of cases, and by nonparametric, rank-order, tests in the remainder. Because randomization rather than random sampling is the norm in biomedical research and because group sizes are usually small, exact permutation or randomization tests for differences in location should be preferred to t or F tests.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 342

Metadata

Authors
Ludbrook, J., & Dudley, H.
Venue
The American Statistician
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1998-05
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pages
127-132
ISSN
  • 0003-1305 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2731
DOI
10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551
OpenAlex
W2051685487
Cited by
342
References
37
FWCI
9.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Permutation Tests are Superior to t and F Tests in Biomedical Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551
The paper
Ludbrook, J., & Dudley, H. (1998). Why Permutation Tests are Superior to t and F Tests in Biomedical Research. The American Statistician. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1998.10480551

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.