Sentence examples for interpreting correlation from inspiring English sources

Apparently the researchers reviewed above use the terms 'prediction', 'ranking' and 'substitution' interchangeably, and that is perhaps why so many mistakes have been made in interpreting correlation coefficients.

While there may be some indication of a direct relationship between EMSA band II signal and reporter ELISA results, we suggest caution in interpreting correlation meta-analysis.

Several technical resources are available to guide analysts in building and interpreting correlation models [ 23, 24], as well as review articles [ 8, 25, 26] and biomedical examples are also available [ 27, 28].

Based on these findings, caution should be used when interpreting correlation of systemic response to MET therapy if MET expression was generally obtained from tissue from the primary tumor.

Qualitative descriptors adopted for interpreting correlation coefficients were as follows: 0 to 0.25 represents little or no association, 0.26 to 0.5 represents a fair association, 0.51 to 0.75 represents moderate to good association, and greater than 0.75 represents good to excellent association [ 33].

However, caution is required in interpreting correlation of propofol concentrations with RSS as these sedation scores reflect the combination of propofol and opioid effects.

The nuclear background in which these mtDNA haplotypes are found is a factor that may contribute to difficulty in detecting and interpreting correlations between mitochondrial haplogroups and longevity.

Clearly, care has to be taken when interpreting correlations.

One hypothesis of pathway-based approaches is that the genetic interactions found in pathway databases carry information for interpreting correlations between gene expression changes detected in cancer.

Relationships between other variables are presented in Additional file 1, but it should be remembered that with 23 non-independent variables there are 253 correlations reported, and therefore care should be taken in interpreting correlations to avoid Type 1 errors.

These observations stress the need for caution in interpreting correlations between ROS-elevating manipulations and cell death but also suggest novel combination strategies and a deeper investigation of electrophilic small molecules as potential cancer-selective agents.