Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Statistical Analysis: Overview

Statistical Analysis: Overview

When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...

Ratio Level of Measurement

Ratio Level of Measurement

The way a set of data is measured is called its level of measurement. Correct statistical procedures depend on a researcher being familiar with levels of measurement. For analysis, data are classified into four levels of measurement—nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio.
A set of data measured using the ratio scale takes care of the ratio problem and provides complete information. Ratio scale data are like interval scale data, except they have a zero point and ratios can be calculated. For...

Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test

Comparing Experimental Results: Student's t-Test

The t-test is a statistical method used to compare the sample mean with a population mean or compare two means from two data sets. The test statistic is calculated from the standard deviation, mean, and number of measurements in the data set at a selected confidence interval and then compared to a table of critical values at this confidence level. If the test statistic is smaller than the critical value, the null hypothesis is accepted. In this case, we state that the difference between the...

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple Comparison Tests

Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...

Interval Level of Measurement

Interval Level of Measurement

For effective statistical analysis, data are classified into four levels of measurement—nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio.
Data measured using the interval scale are similar to ordinal level data because they have a definite arrangement. However, in the interval level of measurement, the differences between data values are meaningful even though the data does not have a starting point.
Temperature is measured using the interval scale. It is measurable data, and the difference between the...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Population attributable fraction.

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2018

Same author

Reporting guidelines for oncology research: helping to maximise the impact of your research.

British journal of cancer·2018

Same author

Updating standards for reporting diagnostic accuracy: the development of STARD 2015.

Research integrity and peer review·2018

Same author

Do declarative titles affect readers' perceptions of research findings? A randomized trial.

Research integrity and peer review·2018

Same author

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries.

PloS one·2018

Same author

The INTERGROWTH-21<sup>st</sup> fetal growth standards: toward the global integration of pregnancy and pediatric care.

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology·2018

Same journal

The Time-out.

Anesthesiology·2026

Same journal

Evaluation of Post-block Hypersensitivity Using Quantitative Sensory Testing Before, During, and After Axillary Brachial Plexus Block Resolution in Healthy Volunteers.

Anesthesiology·2026

Same journal

The state of medical education research in Anesthesiology: Current landscape and future directions - An initiative of the Anesthesia Research Council.

Anesthesiology·2026

Same journal

Diagnostic Ultrasound-guided Focused Ultrasound-induced Noninvasive, Reversible Peripheral Nerve Blockade in an In Vivo Model of Acute Pain: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Anesthesiology·2026

Same journal

S-Ketamine Reduces Risk of Postoperative Delirium: Comment.

Anesthesiology·2026

Same journal

Computed Tomography-Based Body Composition Assessment for Preoperative Cardiovascular Risk Prediction: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Anesthesiology·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 27, 2026

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

Agreed statistics: measurement method comparison.

J Martin Bland¹, Douglas G Altman

¹Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom. martin.bland@york.ac.uk

|December 2, 2011

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a statistical method for comparing clinical measurement techniques. It highlights the inadequacy of correlation coefficients and proposes a superior approach using graphical analysis and simple calculations for assessing agreement.

More Related Videos

Software-Assisted Quantitative Measurement of Osteoarthritic Subchondral Bone Thickness

Software-Assisted Quantitative Measurement of Osteoarthritic Subchondral Bone Thickness

Published on: March 18, 2022

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 27, 2026

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

Software-Assisted Quantitative Measurement of Osteoarthritic Subchondral Bone Thickness

Software-Assisted Quantitative Measurement of Osteoarthritic Subchondral Bone Thickness

Published on: March 18, 2022

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

A Two-interval Forced-choice Task for Multisensory Comparisons

Published on: November 9, 2018

Area of Science:

Biostatistics
Clinical Measurement
Medical Statistics

Background:

Assessing agreement between two clinical measurement methods is crucial for validating new techniques against established ones.
Inappropriate statistical analysis, particularly the use of correlation coefficients, is common in such comparative studies.
Correlation coefficients can be misleading when evaluating the agreement between measurement methods.

Observation:

The study identifies a common pitfall in analyzing clinical measurement agreement: the misuse of correlation coefficients.
A graphical approach combined with simple calculations offers a more appropriate method for assessing agreement.
The proposed method is related to the assessment of measurement repeatability.

Findings:

Correlation coefficients are inappropriate for assessing agreement between two measurement methods.
A Bland-Altman plot and associated calculations provide a more suitable method for evaluating agreement.
This method allows for the quantification of the difference and limits of agreement between measurements.

Implications:

Adoption of the proposed statistical methods can lead to more accurate validation of new clinical measurement techniques.
Improved methods for assessing agreement will enhance the reliability and interchangeability of clinical measurements.
This work provides a foundational statistical framework for clinical method comparison studies.