The phrase "are attributable to random" is not entirely correct as it is missing a noun after "random" to clarify what is being referred to.
You can use it in contexts discussing causes or effects that are linked to randomness, but it needs to be completed for clarity.
Example: "The variations in the data are attributable to random fluctuations in the sample."
Alternatives: "are due to chance" or "result from randomness".
Further research is needed to explore how timing of exposure within this narrow window may affect the risk of CHDs or whether the fluctuations in results we observed when examining weekly exposure are attributable to random noise.
It is unlikely that our results are attributable to random variation because we observed a consistent association between prenatal urinary BPA concentrations and externalizing behaviors in females that became stronger in measurements taken earlier in pregnancy.
Given the consistency among multiple end points, statistical significance of the results, and reproducibility of these nonmonotonic events from previous studies (Yan et al. 2011), we consider it unlikely that the observed nonmonotonic dose responses are attributable to random fluctuation.
To correct for this, as well as to check whether the results could be attributable to random noise, I ran a simple regression analysis that explains a candidate's share of the vote in New Hampshire as a function of whether or not he was endorsed by The Union Leader and his polling average at the time.
Most (55%-66%) of the observed variation was attributable to random differences between repeated measurements in the same kidney.
First, the SEM accounts for the possibility that some of the change observed with a particular measure may be attributable to random error.
The relationship between victimization and anxiety was also apparent when maternal report was examined, although using this single question resulted in lower estimates of the association that could be attributable to random misclassification.
If the associations of ASD with the pollutants were attributable to random noise, we would expect a symmetrical distribution around 1, with a wider distribution of ORs as the p-values got smaller.
Profiling can be quite complicated, as there is variation between providers for at least three reasons: 1) differences may be attributable to random variation due to the size of the provider, 2) the patient case-mix varies from provider to provider, and 3) providers may differ in the effectiveness of their care [ 30].
