1977
DOI: 10.1016/0002-9394(77)90461-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gerald L. Portney, M.D. 1937–1977

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

2
16
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A secondary result of this study was the achievement of excellent intrarater reliability (ICC = 0.96) (20). This ICC exceeded the reliability c e efficient5 reported by Wikholm and Bohannon (27) and Riddle et a1 (22).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 43%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A secondary result of this study was the achievement of excellent intrarater reliability (ICC = 0.96) (20). This ICC exceeded the reliability c e efficient5 reported by Wikholm and Bohannon (27) and Riddle et a1 (22).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 43%
“…Pearson productmoment correlation coefficients were calculated to describe the strength of linear association among the variables (Table 1 ) . Scatterplots were created demonstrating the relationship between isometric RM and isotonic 10 RM (Figures 3 and 4) ally, a stepwise regression analysis was performed to develop a predictive equation for 10 RM (20). Subject age, gender, weight, leg length, mean HHD value, thigh girth, and skin-fold thickness were potential predictor variables.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DIFFERENCE and ANGLE were not normally distributed, therefore, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used for the analysis. The correlation between DIFFERENCE and ANGLE was moderate to good 5 ) (r s =0.59, p<0.05). DIFFERENCE increased with ANGLE (R 2 =0.53, p<0.05).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…The correlation between DIFFERENCE and ANGLE was moderate to good5 ) (r s =0.59, p<0.05). DIFFERENCE increased with ANGLE (R 2 =0.53, p<0.05).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…Differences between groups for continuous data were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test and the Chi-squared test for categorical data. Relationships between HRQoL and psychological well-being variables were explored using correlation coefficients (Pearson or Spearman's rank depending on normality distribution), with correlations interpreted as excellent (>0.75), moderate (0.5–0.75), fair (0.25–0.50) and no relationship (0.00–0.25) [12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%