Sentences with phrase «scale correlation studies»

However, large scale correlation studies are equivocal on whether it causes weight gain or not.

Not exact matches

However large scale studies which show significant correlations like this, and do not include other pieces of social support data to help interpret those correlations, can be misleading.

And across all scales, from very small controlled studies of marine plots to those of entire ocean basins, maintaining biodiversity — the number of extant species across all forms of marine life — appeared key to preserving fisheries, water filtering and other so - called ecosystem services, though the correlation is not entirely clear.

The new computer models and the vast amount of data enabled the team to study the correlation between how quickly new species form and how rapidly they evolve new body sizes on a scale that had not previously been possible.

In agreement with previous studies, our sample exhibits a planet - metallicity correlation at all stellar masses; the fraction of stars that harbor giant planets scales as f \ propto 10 ^ -LCB- 1.2 [Fe / H]-RCB-.

The quantification of local contraction at the micron scale, including its directionality and speed, in correlation with other parameters such as cell invasion, local protein or gene expression, can provide useful information to study wound healing, organism development, and cancer metastasis.

The review authors stated, «Several large scale prospective cohort studies found positive correlation between artificial sweetener use and weight gain.»

This only shows correlation, but studies also show people who have higher levels of inflammatory markers, like c - reactive protein, rank higher on scales that measure depression.

The second study (hereafter the «meta - analysis»), by Credé et al., [iii] is a systematic review of data from all the published studies that could be found in which participants who were at least of middle school age and in which correlations were reported or could be calculated between scores on any of Duckworth's grit scales and other variables.

The paper he wrote together with Friis - Christensen in which he found a correlation between solar activity and clouds had a «slight» flaw: it ignored that the period of the study coincided with a big El Nino, and that large scale changes in ocean surface temperature are going to have an effect on cloud formation.

A study using data from Polar drifting ice buoys showed that near surface air temperatures over the pack ice are relatively homogenous, with a CLS (correlation length scale) of 900-1000 km, see (Rigor 2000).

With the proposed increases in the number of windfarms to meet the Large - scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET), this correlation study is formative to identifying price and power stability issues and determining what transmission structure is required to best facilitate the absorption of wind power.

The greatest disappointment in this study was the lack of significant correlation between VIEW and the main COPE scales of Problem - focused, Emotion - focused, and Avoidance Coping styles.

Many of the scales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales demonstrated weak psychometrics in at least one of the following ways: (a) lack of psychometric data [i.e., reliability and / or validity; e.g., HFQ, MASC, PBS, Social Adjustment Scale - Self - Report (SAS - SR) and all perceived self - esteem and self - concept scales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales], (b) items that fall on more than one subscale (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version), (c) low alpha coefficients (e.g., below.60) for some subscales, which calls into question the utility of using these subscales in research and clinical work (e.g., HFQ, MMPI - A, CBCL - 1991 version, BASC, PSPCSAYC), (d) high correlations between subscales (e.g., PANAS - C), (e) lack of clarity regarding clinically - relevant cut - off scores, yielding high false positive and false negative rates (e.g., CES - D, CDI) and an inability to distinguish between minor (i.e., subclinical) and major (i.e., clinical) «cases» of a disorder (e.g., depression; CDI, BDI), (f) lack of correspondence between items and DSM criteria (e.g., CBCL - 1991 version, CDI, BDI, CES - D, (g) a factor structure that lacks clarity across studies (e.g., PSPCSAYC, CASI; although the factor structure is often difficult to assess in studies of pediatric populations, given the small sample sizes), (h) low inter-rater reliability for interview and observational methods (e.g., CGAS), (i) low correlations between respondents such as child, parent, teacher [e.g., BASC, PSPCSAYC, CSI, FSSC - R, SCARED, Connors Ratings Scales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiScales - Revised (CRS - R)-RSB-, (j) the inclusion of somatic or physical symptom items on mental health subscales (e.g., CBCL), which is a problem when conducting studies of children with pediatric physical conditions because physical symptoms may be a feature of the condition rather than an indicator of a mental health problem, (k) high correlations with measures of social desirability, which is particularly problematic for the self - related rating scales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales and for child - report scales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsiscales more generally, and (l) content validity problems (e.g., the RCMAS is a measure of anxiety, but contains items that tap mood, attention, peer interactions, and impulsivity).

Study 2 examined correlation between the PNS - J and other related variables (big - five personality traits and need for cognition) to show convergent and discriminant evidence of validity of the PNS - J, and evaluated test - retest reliability of the scale.

The relationship between depressive symptoms and step count has only been assessed in specific populations with small sample sizes, such as low - socioeconomic status Latino immigrants, 16 elderly Japanese people17 or patients with chronic conditions such as heart failure18 19 or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.20 21 Studies yield contradictory results, with some observing no association between depressive symptoms and daily step count, 19 21 while others report a negative correlation.16 — 18 20 In one cross-sectional sample of healthy older adults, an inverse association between depressive symptoms (using the Goldberg Depression Scale - 15) and accelerometer measured daily step count disappeared after controlling for general health and disability.22 While a systematic review suggests reduced levels of objectively measured PA in patients with depression, 23 it is not known whether this association is present in those at high risk of CVD and taken into account important confounding such as gender and age.

Table 5 presents the scale level means and standard deviations and Table 6 presents the correlations among the scales administered in Study 3.

However, the reliabilities for the ERPSST measure were consistent with scales with other published, widely - used scales, such as the CU scale from the APSD, and the fact that the correlations (see Table 2) were in expected directions suggests reliability was not a major concern for this study.

The second study (hereafter the «meta - analysis»), by Credé et al., [iii] is a systematic review of data from all the published studies that could be found in which participants who were at least of middle school age and in which correlations were reported or could be calculated between scores on any of Duckworth's grit scales and other variables.

However, an exception could possibly be made for the hyperactivity / inattention problem scale of the SDQ - T; this subscale demonstrated both the highest reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.88) and highest validity (Spearman's correlation coefficient 0.72) in our study.

The two scales were positively related to each other and correlations with other variables included in this study were in a similar direction.