The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Agreed Statistics: Measurement Method Comparison
Abstract
Statistical Methods for Assessing Agreement between Two Methods of Clinical Measurement. By J. Martin Bland, Douglas G. Altman. Lancet 1986; 1(8476):307-10. Abstract reprinted with permission of Elsevier, copyright 1986. In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old. Such investigations are often analyzed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is described, together with the relation between this analysis and the assessment of repeatability.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Self-citationMeasuring agreement in method comparison studies
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800204 · Cited by 9,619
Self-citationAgreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (2007) · Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1080/10543400701329422 · Cited by 1,864
Self-citation
Cited by
Accuracy of commercially available heart rate monitors in athletes: a prospective study
Pasadyn, S. R., Soudan, M., Gillinov, M., Houghtaling, P., Phelan, D., Gillinov, N., Bittel, B., & Desai, M. Y. (2019) · Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy · doi:10.21037/cdt.2019.06.05 · Cited by 135
Campa, F., Matias, C. N., Moro, T., Cerullo, G., Casolo, A., Teixeira, F. J., & Paoli, A. (2023) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu15020278 · Cited by 33
Nygren, A., Rennerfelt, K., & Zhang, Q. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing · doi:10.1007/s10877-013-9494-x · Cited by 33
Campa, F., Bongiovanni, T., Rossi, A., Cerullo, G., Casolo, A., Martera, G., Trecroci, A., Moro, T., & Paoli, A. (2023) · Journal of Translational Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12967-023-04795-z · Cited by 15
“Agreement between BIA-based models and the criterion procedure was determined using the Bland–Altman method [39], including the analysis of the correlation between the mean and the difference of the methods and an estimate of the 95% limits of agreement (LoA).”
MethodToselli, S., Campa, F., Matias, C. N., de Alencar Silva, B. S., dos Santos, V. R., Maietta Latessa, P., & Gobbo, L. A. (2021) · Experimental Gerontology · doi:10.1016/j.exger.2021.111393 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Bland, J. M., Altman, D. G., & Warner, D. S.
- Venue
- Anesthesiology
- Published
- 2012-01-01
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 182-185
- ISSN
- 0003-3022 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2078614820
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 21.27
- 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
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.
