Sentences with phrase «confidence intervals in»

A gradient at age 23 was still notable but nonsignificant as the overlapping confidence intervals in lower and upper range of relationship quality demonstrate.

The inspection of 95 % confidence intervals in Table 3 (a) revealed a significant overall mediation (i.e., the sum of all indirect effects) for all the dependent variables considered: ERQ suppression, SRRS rumination, SRRS hopelessness, Avoidant Coping, NAS avoidance.

To report estimates and confidence intervals in the original scale, we also analyzed the original data after replacing values beyond the inner fence of a box and whisker plot with the value at the inner fence.

The 95 % confidence intervals in Figs. 2 and 3 represent uncertainty in the statistical estimates of the regression model for observed paths of forcings, SOI, and volcanic sulfates.

The shaded region denotes coupling at the p = 0.95 level as calculated from the surrogate data used for the confidence intervals in Figure 1 (top).

This is the basis for Gleser & Hwang's theorem on the non-existence of finite confidence intervals in errors - in - variables models.

I would love someone to measure the average width of confidence intervals in Figures from both Nature and Science in a single month of 2013, 2003, 1993 and 1983.

I wonder if we could apply bootstrap or similar methods to the ensemble forecasts, and thereby put some uncertainty bounds / confidence intervals in the graphs to distinguish between the confidence in the mean trend lines, and confidence in the noise affecting the trends from one year to the next.

Notice that the 75 percent confidence intervals in Figure 4 are centered on the same point estimates as are the 95 percent confidence intervals in Figure 1.

Of course, that scenario is inconceivable: it would require the confidence intervals in Figure 1 to have zero length and teachers» true value - added scores to be perfectly correlated from one year to the next.

For the math inclined: General Deming Regression for Estimating Systematic Bias and Its Confidence Interval in Method - Comparison Studies, Robert F. Martin, Clinical Chemistry, Jan 2000, Vol.

Note that observed temperature moves below the 95 % confidence interval in 2000 and 2008 for the global surface temperature as driven by anthropogenic changes only (red line).

[Response: Yes, the last two graphs show the trend estimate (from the given start time through March 2010) and its confidence interval, i.e., the confidence interval in the underlying trend.

Remember that the day before yesterday I used simulation to calculate my forecasting confidence interval in 2008, considering only the information available in the period 1880 - 1935.

Not exact matches

The chance that what's happening in reality is captured by a number outside the 95 % confidence interval is, as you might expect, quite unlikely.

In addition to confidence intervals, the forecasting process leads us to think about the risks associated with specific economic developments and to quantify those where possible.

The farther into time we guess - timate, the larger these confidence intervals become, but not in a linear or gradual way.

In science, we calculate uncertainty using confidence intervals.

Results: In the two groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52 % (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51 % (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95 % confidence interval 0.92 - 1.15In the two groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52 % (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51 % (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95 % confidence interval 0.92 - 1.15in 52 % (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51 % (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95 % confidence interval 0.92 - 1.15).

Complications occurred in 59 % (352/601) of patients certain of receiving intercessory prayer compared with the 52 % (315/604) of those uncertain of receiving intercessory prayer (relative risk 1.14, 95 % confidence interval 1.02 - 1.28).

We included prospective studies that provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for at least three categories (including the reference group) of milk consumption in relation to mortality from all causes, overall cardiovascular disease, or overall cancer, We omitted studies that only reported results for total milk products or combined non-fermented and fermented milk because non-fermented and fermented milk may have different associations with mortality.

Jurgen Klopp would have been eager to get his troops in at half - time to boost their confidence and plot a second - half comeback, but Andreas Weimann made it doubly difficult for him as he found the back of the net just before the interval.

In addition, the software tool used for nearly two thirds of the meta - analysis calculations contains serious errors that can dramatically underestimate confidence intervals (CIs), and this resulted in at least 1 spuriously statistically significant resulIn addition, the software tool used for nearly two thirds of the meta - analysis calculations contains serious errors that can dramatically underestimate confidence intervals (CIs), and this resulted in at least 1 spuriously statistically significant resulin at least 1 spuriously statistically significant result.

«In the subgroup of women with spontaneous onset of labour and vaginal deliveries, after controlling for other obstetric and demographic factors, epidural analgesia but not narcotic analgesia was significantly associated with reduced breastfeeding duration (adjusted hazard ratio 1.44, 95 % confidence interval 1.04 - 1.99).»

Intrapartum and neonatal death at 0 — 7 days was observed in 0.15 % of planned home compared with 0.18 % in planned hospital births (crude relative risk 0.80, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.71 — 0.91).

For the restricted sample of women without any complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the odds of a primary outcome event were higher for births planned at home compared with planned obstetric unit births (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52) but there was no evidence of a difference for either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric units.

In the subgroup analysis stratified by parity, there was an increased incidence of the primary outcome for nulliparous women in the planned home birth group (weighted incidence 9.3 per 1000 births, 95 % confidence interval 6.5 to 13.1) compared with the obstetric unit group (weighted incidence 5.3, 3.9 to 7.3In the subgroup analysis stratified by parity, there was an increased incidence of the primary outcome for nulliparous women in the planned home birth group (weighted incidence 9.3 per 1000 births, 95 % confidence interval 6.5 to 13.1) compared with the obstetric unit group (weighted incidence 5.3, 3.9 to 7.3in the planned home birth group (weighted incidence 9.3 per 1000 births, 95 % confidence interval 6.5 to 13.1) compared with the obstetric unit group (weighted incidence 5.3, 3.9 to 7.3).

The confidence intervals for the various complications in nulliparous women include 1.

Results: 50 perinatal deaths occurred in 7002 planned home births in Australia during 1985 - 90: 7.1 per 1000 (95 % confidence interval 5.2 to 9.1) according to Australian definitions and 6.4 per 1000 (4.6 to 8.3) according to World Health Organisation definitions.

The death rate for infants weighing 2500 g in 1985 - 8 was 5.7 per 1000 in home births compared with 3.6 per 1000 nationally (relative risk 1.6; 95 % confidence interval 1.1 to 2.4).

Using a 3 % discount rate, suboptimal breastfeeding incurs a total of $ 17.4 billion in cost to society resulting from premature death (95 % confidence interval [CI] $ 4.38 — 24.68 billion), $ 733.7 million in direct costs (95 % CI $ 612.9 — 859.7 million), and $ 126.1 million indirect morbidity costs (95 % CI $ 99.00 — 153.22 million).

Horizontal lines represent 95 % confidence intervals and arrows 95 % confidence intervals that were clipped when the confidence limits extended to extreme values (e.g., odds ratios of 0.03 or 9.5) in order to maintain the readability of the central portion of the graph.

Results No symptoms or outpatient visits were significantly more common among infants sleeping on the side or supine than in infants sleeping prone, and 3 symptoms were less common: (1) fever at 1 month in infants sleeping in the supine (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.34 - 0.93) and side positions (OR, 0.48; 95 % CI, 0.28 - 0.82); (2) stuffy nose at 6 months in the supine (OR, 0.74; 95 % CI, 0.61 - 0.89) and side positions (OR, 0.82; 95 % CI, 0.68 - 0.99); and (3) trouble sleeping at 6 months in the supine (OR, 0.57; 95 % CI, 0.44 - 0.73) and side positions (OR, 0.69; 95 % CI, 0.53 - 0.89).

RESULTS: Compared with never - breastfed infants, those who were breastfed exclusively until the age of 4 months and partially thereafter had lower risks of infections in the URTI, LRTI, and GI until the age of 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.65 [95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.51 — 0.83]; aOR: 0.50 [CI: 0.32 — 0.79]; and aOR: 0.41 [CI: 0.26 — 0.64], respectively) and of LRTI infections between the ages of 7 and 12 months (aOR: 0.46 [CI: 0.31 — 0.69]-RRB-.

Results of the analyses continue to confirm that all forms of extra support analyzed together showed a decrease in cessation of «any breastfeeding», which includes partial and exclusive breastfeeding (average risk ratio (RR) for stopping any breastfeeding before six months 0.91, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.95; moderate - quality evidence, 51 studies) and for stopping breastfeeding before four to six weeks (average RR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.80 to 0.95; moderate - quality evidence, 33 studies).

Using multiple logistic regression, we estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (95 % CI) for differences in medical indications during pregnancy comparing the following groups (based on initial preferences): midwife - led home birth versus midwife - led hospital birth, midwife - led home birth versus obstetrician - led hospital birth and midwife - led hospital birth versus obstetrician - led hospital birth.

Planned out - of - hospital birth was associated with increased odds of perinatal death (adjusted odds ratio, 2.43; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.37 to 4.30; adjusted risk difference, 1.52 deaths per 1000 births; 95 % CI, 0.51 to 2.54 per 1000) and neonatal death (adjusted odds ratio, 2.87; 95 % CI, 1.10 to 7.47; adjusted risk difference, 0.63 deaths per \ 1000 births; 95 % CI, 0.03 to 1.24 per 1000), but there was no significant increase in the odds of infant death.

Planned out - of - hospital birth was associated with a higher rate of perinatal death than was planned in - hospital birth (3.9 vs. 1.8 deaths per 1000 deliveries, P = 0.003; odds ratio after adjustment for maternal characteristics and medical conditions, 2.43; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.37 to 4.30; adjusted risk difference, 1.52 deaths per 1000 births; 95 % CI, 0.51 to 2.54).

Results Mothers delivering in accredited maternity units were more likely to start breastfeeding than those delivering in units with neither award [adjusted rate ratio: 1.10, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.05 — 1.15], but were not more likely to breastfeed at 1 month (0.96, 95 % CI 0.84 — 1.09), after adjustment for social, demographic, and obstetric factors.

After adjustment for country of residence and individual social, demographic, and obstetric characteristics, mothers who delivered in an accredited hospital were 10 % more likely to start breastfeeding: adjusted rate ratio [95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.10 (1.05 — 1.15)-RSB-, than those who delivered in a unit with neither award (Table 4).

However, graded inequalities by maternal education emerged in the intervention group -LCB- relative risk [RR] = 1.12 [95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.04, 1.20] for partial university and RR = 1.20 [95 % CI: 1.11, 1.31] for secondary education or less vs complete university; risk difference [RD] = 0.06 [95 % CI: 0.03, 0.09] and 0.10 [95 % CI: 0.06, 0.14], respectively -RCB-.

In a convenience sample of 45 children during a 1 - week training workshop provided by child psychologists and psychiatrists, inter-paediatrician agreement was high, with Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.80 (95 % confidence interval: 0.67, 0.89) for vocabulary, 0.72 (0.54, 0.83) for similarities, 0.80 (0.67, 0.89) for block designs and 0.79 (0.66, 0.88) for matrices.16 Since we previously reported that the intervention resulted in significantly higher verbal IQ scores in intention - to - treat analysis, 16 we focused on results for verbal IQ scores in the present studIn a convenience sample of 45 children during a 1 - week training workshop provided by child psychologists and psychiatrists, inter-paediatrician agreement was high, with Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.80 (95 % confidence interval: 0.67, 0.89) for vocabulary, 0.72 (0.54, 0.83) for similarities, 0.80 (0.67, 0.89) for block designs and 0.79 (0.66, 0.88) for matrices.16 Since we previously reported that the intervention resulted in significantly higher verbal IQ scores in intention - to - treat analysis, 16 we focused on results for verbal IQ scores in the present studin significantly higher verbal IQ scores in intention - to - treat analysis, 16 we focused on results for verbal IQ scores in the present studin intention - to - treat analysis, 16 we focused on results for verbal IQ scores in the present studin the present study.

In further analyses restricted to women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52In further analyses restricted to women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52).

However, the wide confidence intervals of our estimates for socioeconomic inequalities in IQ preclude definite conclusions.

The estimate for the effect of fluoxetine was an average deficit of 392 g (95 % confidence interval: − 5 g, − 780 g) in postnatal weight in a model containing the breastfeeding medication group, gender, birth weight, and age of the infant at the time of measurement (Table 2).

The difference in the average treatment effect in overall fetal loss and neonatal death across included trials between women allocated to midwife - led continuity models of care and women allocated to other models has an average risk ratio (RR) of 0.84, with 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.99 (participants = 17561; studies = 13).

Nevertheless, despite the model controlling for parity and many other known confounders, there remains a greatly elevated risk of PPH for women who have planned hospital births in comparison to those who plan a home birth (odds ratio, 2.5, 95 % confidence interval, 1.7 to 3.8).

The difference in the average treatment effect in all fetal loss before and after 24 weeks plus neonatal death across included trials between women allocated to midwife - led continuity models of care and women allocated to other models has an average risk ratio (RR) of 0.84, with 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.99 (participants = 17561; studies = 13).

In future updates, for dichotomous data, we will present results as summary risk ratios with 95 % confidence intervals.

Controlled trials of exclusive versus mixed breastfeeding for four to six months, developing countries Infant outcomes Growth Weight gain was not significantly different between infants assigned to continued exclusive breastfeeding to six months versus those assigned to mixed breastfeeding from four to six months, with a mean difference (MD) in weight gain from four to six months of 20.78 g / mo (95 % confidence interval (CI)-LSB--21.99 to 63.54], p = 0.34; 2 trials / 265 infants) and from six to 12 months of -2.62 g / mo (95 % CI -LSB--25.85 to 20.62], p = 0.83; 2 trials / 233 infants).