Connection

DAVID ALLISON to Reproducibility of Results

This is a "connection" page, showing publications DAVID ALLISON has written about Reproducibility of Results.
Connection Strength

1.729
  1. Adjusting for covariates representing potential confounders, mediators, or competing predictors in the presence of measurement error: Dispelling a potential misapprehension and insights for optimal study design with nutritional epidemiology examples. F1000Res. 2024; 13:827.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.143
  2. Hidden: A Baker's Dozen Ways in Which Research Reporting is Less Transparent than it Could be and Suggestions for Implementing Einstein's Dictum. Sci Eng Ethics. 2024 10 16; 30(6):48.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.138
  3. Randomization, design and analysis for interdependency in aging research: no person or mouse is an island. Nat Aging. 2022 12; 2(12):1101-1111.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.121
  4. Persistent confusion in nutrition and obesity research about the validity of classic nonparametric tests in the presence of heteroscedasticity: evidence of the problem and valid alternatives. Am J Clin Nutr. 2021 03 11; 113(3):517-524.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.107
  5. Improving open and rigorous science: ten key future research opportunities related to rigor, reproducibility, and transparency in scientific research. F1000Res. 2020; 9:1235.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.104
  6. Does exclusion of extreme reporters of energy intake (the "Goldberg cutoffs") reliably reduce or eliminate bias in nutrition studies? Analysis with illustrative associations of energy intake with health outcomes. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 11 01; 110(5):1231-1239.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.098
  7. Issues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 03 13; 115(11):2563-2570.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.087
  8. Scientific rigor and credibility in the nutrition research landscape. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018 03 01; 107(3):484-494.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.087
  9. Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors. Nature. 2016 Feb 04; 530(7588):27-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.075
  10. The importance of prediction model validation and assessment in obesity and nutrition research. Int J Obes (Lond). 2016 06; 40(6):887-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.074
  11. Randomized controlled trial examining expectancy effects on the accuracy of weight measurement. Clin Obes. 2015 Feb; 5(1):38-41.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.070
  12. Self-report-based estimates of energy intake offer an inadequate basis for scientific conclusions. Am J Clin Nutr. 2013 Jun; 97(6):1413-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  13. Childhood obesity as a risk factor for bone fracture: a mechanistic study. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2013 Jul; 21(7):1459-66.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  14. Air-displacement plethysmography pediatric option in 2-6 years old using the four-compartment model as a criterion method. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2012 Aug; 20(8):1732-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  15. Use of causal language in observational studies of obesity and nutrition. Obes Facts. 2010 Dec; 3(6):353-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.053
  16. Rank-based inverse normal transformations are increasingly used, but are they merited? Behav Genet. 2009 Sep; 39(5):580-95.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.048
  17. Epistemological issues in omics and high-dimensional biology: give the people what they want. Physiol Genomics. 2006 Dec 13; 28(1):24-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  18. Optimal allocation of replicates for measurement evaluation studies. Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2006 Aug; 4(3):196-202.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  19. The PowerAtlas: a power and sample size atlas for microarray experimental design and research. BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Feb 22; 7:84.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  20. Towards sound epistemological foundations of statistical methods for high-dimensional biology. Nat Genet. 2004 Sep; 36(9):943-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  21. Nonreplication in genetic association studies of obesity and diabetes research. J Nutr. 2003 Nov; 133(11):3323-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.032
  22. Bias in estimates of quantitative-trait-locus effect in genome scans: demonstration of the phenomenon and a method-of-moments procedure for reducing bias. Am J Hum Genet. 2002 Mar; 70(3):575-85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  23. Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 04; 25(2):327-355.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  24. Predicting treatment attendance and weight loss: assessing the psychometric properties and predictive validity of the Dieting Readiness Test. J Pers Assess. 1997 Feb; 68(1):173-83.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  25. Reproducibility of the QT-variability index in individuals with spinal cord injury. Auton Neurosci. 2016 Feb; 195:16-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  26. Energy balance measurement: when something is not better than nothing. Int J Obes (Lond). 2015 Jul; 39(7):1109-13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  27. The geographic distribution of obesity in the US and the potential regional differences in misreporting of obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2014 Jan; 22(1):300-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  28. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nat Genet. 2009 Feb; 41(2):149-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.011
  29. Dietary restraint and disinhibition do not affect accuracy of 24-hour recall in a multiethnic population. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006 Mar; 106(3):434-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  30. Catechol-O-methyl-transferase functional polymorphism and nicotine dependence: an evaluation of nonreplicated results. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Jun; 14(6):1384-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  31. Body mass index as a measure of adiposity among children and adolescents: a validation study. J Pediatr. 1998 Feb; 132(2):204-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.