The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistics Notes: Detecting skewness from summary information: Table 1
Open accessAbstract
The measurement of airway resistance by the interrupter technique (Rint) needs standardization. Should measurements be made be during the expiratory or inspiratory phase of tidal breathing? In reported studies, the measurement of Rint has been calculated as the median or mean of a small number of values, is there an important difference? Subjects were 2.5–5.0 yrs (median 4.0 yrs) who had previous respiratory symptoms. The Rint in expiration (RintE) and inspiration (RintI) pre and postsalbutamol, the coefficient of variation (CV) of values contributing to measurements, and bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) in both phases were compared. Measurements using median and mean were compared. RintE was higher than RintI by 4% (p<0.01). The CV of values making up RintE and RintI, and BDR measured in expiration and inspiration were similar. The median difference between means and medians of values making up measurements was 0.6% (range −6–11%). RintE has been shown to be consistently greater then RintI but the difference in this study is small. It is suggested that one or the other is chosen as the standard. In the present data the mean of a set of values contributing to a measurement was not significantly different from the median. However, the use of the median has been recommended since it is less affected by possible outlying values such as might be included by fully automated equipment.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“when a scale starts from the finite number zero, the standard deviation, when multiplied by two, is less than the mean (as otherwise the mean is unlikely to be an appropriate measure of the centre of the distribution (Altman 1996)”
From Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders. (2017) · cites this paper as Altman 1996
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
Statistics notes: The normal distribution
Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6975.298 · Cited by 549
Statistics Notes: Transforming data
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7033.770 · Cited by 297
Statistics Notes: Quartiles, quintiles, centiles, and other quantiles
Altman, D. G., & Bland, M. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6960.996 · Cited by 181
Effects of Environmental Tobacco Smoke on Urinary Cotinine Excretion in Nonsmokers
Matsukura, S., Taminato, T., Kitano, N., Seino, Y., HAMADA, H., Uchihashi, M., Nakajima, H., & Hirata, Y. (1984) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198409273111305 · Cited by 177
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults
Kleinstäuber, M., Witthöft, M., Steffanowski, A., van Marwijk, H., Hiller, W., & Lambert, M. J. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010628.pub2 · Cited by 11,369
Normality Tests for Statistical Analysis: A Guide for Non-Statisticians
Ghasemi, A., & Zahediasl, S. (2012) · International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism · doi:10.5812/ijem.3505 · Cited by 4,368
Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P. T., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cited by 2,782
Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., Altman, D. G., & on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch10 · Cited by 2,672
Self-citationAnalysing Data and Undertaking Meta‐Analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch9 · Cited by 1,800
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- ORCID
- Altman, Douglas G
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1996-11-09
- Volume
- 313
- Issue
- 7066
- Pages
- 1200.1
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC2352469
- OpenAlex
- W1591259115
- Cited by
- 1,278
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 54 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 72 · 2014: 79 · 2013: 70 · 2012: 87
- FWCI
- 5.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- airway resistance, interrupter technique, coefficient of variation, bronchodilator responsiveness, salbutamol, pediatric respiratory symptoms, measurement standardization, skewness
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance
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