On the Asymptotic Theory of Tests of Independence Based on Bivariate Layer Ranks

1 online resource (PDF, 89 pages

An Extension of a Result of Lehmann on the Asymptotic Efficiency of Selection Procedures Based on Ranks

1 online resource (PDF, 7 pages

A Note On Nonparametric Tests For Scale

1 online resource (PDF, 6 pages

An Analysis of Driving Performance Measures Used to Assess the Effects of Medications on Drowsiness, Sedation and Driving Impairment

The objective of this paper was to discuss driving scenarios and associated driving performance measures on their ability to demonstrate drowsiness, sedation, and driving impairment. The basis of this paper was a study that utilized a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, four-treatment, four-period crossover trial in the Iowa Driving Simulator (IDS). Participants were 40 licensed drivers with seasonal allergic rhinitis who were 25 to 44 years of age. Treatments were Fexofenadine, diphenhydramine, alcohol, or placebo, given at weekly intervals before participants drove for 1 hour in the IDS. Measures examined included coherence, amplitude, phase angle, RMS error, following distance and behavior, lane keeping, response to unexpected vehicle intrusion and drowsiness. Study results show that sedating antihistamines impair driving performance as seriously as alcohol. Statistically significant but small correlations were found between subjective drowsiness and minimum following distance, steering instability, and left-lane excursions but no correlation was greater than 0.21. Drowsiness was a weak predictor of driving impairment. This paper discusses these and other finding with an emphasis on the adequacy of driving scenarios and the sensitivity of driving performance measures analyzed

OMERACT consensus-based operational definition of contextual factors in rheumatology clinical trials: A mixed methods study

Objectives: To develop an operational definition of contextual factors (CF) [1]. Methods: Based on previously conducted interviews, we presented three CF types in a Delphi survey; Effect Modifying -, Outcome Influencing - and Measurement Affecting CFs. Subsequently, a virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) session was held for in depth discussion of Effect Modifying CFs. Results: Of 161 Delphi participants, 129 (80%) completed both rounds. After two rounds, we reached consensus (≥70% agreeing) for all but two statements. The 45 SIG participants were broadly supportive. Conclusion: Through consensus we developed an operational definition of CFs, which was well received by OMERACT members

Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project

Background and objectives: Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Methods: Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. Results: Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. Conclusion: By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia

Hierarchical Models for Employment Decisions

Federal law prohibits discrimination in employment decisions against persons in certain protected categories. The common method for measuring discrimination involves a comparison of some aggregate statistic for protected and non-protected individuals. This approach is open to question when employment decisions are made over an extended time period. We show how to use hierarchical proportional hazards models (Cox regression models) to analyze such data. When decisions are made at one time, the proportional hazards model reduces to the familiar doubly constrained hypergeometric model. Key words: Age Discrimination; Bayesian Analysis; Hierarchical Model; Proportional Hazards Model 1 Introduction Federal law forbids discrimination against employees or applicants because of an employees race, sex, religion, national origin, age 40 or older , or handicap. General discrimination law -- say discrimination by race or sex -- offers two somewhat distinct legal theories. A disparate treatment cas..

Comparison Of Spine Kinematics Between Dominant And Non-dominant Leg Kicking In Collegiate Women Soccer Players

Work published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

Comparison Of Spine Kinematics Between Dominant And Non-dominant Leg Kicking In Collegiate Women Soccer Players

Presentation given at the Annual Meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine