试验统计方法课程教学改革探索与实践     

许海霞  任妍  程西永  董中东  詹克慧 《现代农业科技》2014,(10):333-334

介绍了试验统计方法课程的基本理论体系和教学目标,指出了试验统计方法课程教学中存在的主要问题,并提出了课程教学改革理念及思路,以为试验统计方法课程教学改革提供参考。  相似文献   

基于Web环境下农机统计图表的实现   总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1  

李骅  尹文庆  齐新丹 《安徽农业科学》2005,33(8):1395-1396

就Web环境下农机统计图表的实现进行了探讨。实现统计图表的方法有组件技术及运行ASP脚本语言编程两种方式,结合笔者的编程实例,给出了两种实现方式的部分源代码及图例。  相似文献   

因子分析与聚类分析在企业信用评级中的应用   总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3  

奚胜田  詹原瑞  韩著钊 《中国农机化》2009,(1)

运用多元统计中的因子分析和聚类分析方法,对在沪深交易所上市的33家农业机械和建筑机械行业的生产企业进行信用评级分析.先用因子分析方法从选取的变量中找出合适的因子,计算出各个企业的因子得分,然后将这些因子作为变量,进行聚类分析,并对照标准普尔(S&P)的评级体系确定各个企业的评级级别.  相似文献   

金华市1961～2011年梅雨特征量的统计分析     

应瑶  冯利华  赵锃爽  王学烨  姚丹蕾  钟建利  张行才 《安徽农业科学》2014,(29):10242-10244,10247

利用金华市1961～2011年的年降水量和逐日降水量资料,分析梅雨特征量（梅雨起讫日期、梅雨期长度、梅雨量、梅雨强度）的基本统计特征及其相互关系,并在此基础上对梅雨汛期的年际和年代际变化、周期和变化趋势进行了研究,最后探讨了各梅雨特征量对厄尔尼诺（拉尼娜）年的响应。结果表明,金华市梅雨年际和年代际变化明显,大致存在22年的周期;厄尔尼诺年,金华市出梅偏迟,梅雨期长度偏长,梅雨量偏多,梅雨强度偏强;拉尼娜年,金华市梅雨量偏少,梅雨强度偏弱。  相似文献   

关于Spearman系数计算公式的论证及应用     

王钦德  冯锁江 《山西农业大学学报(自然科学版)》1993,13(1):30-33

鉴于一般数理统计及生物统计著作中对 Spearman 系数 r_■的介绍久全面,作为补充,本文着重对 r_■的计算公式及其矫正作了较详细的论证,同时列举了应用实例并指出了显著性检验的方法。  相似文献   

成对或不成对反转试验设计     

王继华  贾青 《中国牛业科学》2002,28(3):1-5

本文系统探讨了反转试验（交叉设计）设计的数学模型。统计分析方法和原理以及设计要求，根据t-测验思想，给出了成对或不成对反转试验设计的原理和方法。  相似文献   

表层土壤盐分空间变异性及合理采样数与信息估计     

史海滨  陈亚新  朝伦巴根  长崛金造  赤江刚夫 《内蒙古农业大学学报(自然科学版)》1996,(4)

本文以气候寒冷干燥、具有土壤盐碱化问题的中国河套灌区为背景，将地质统计学和经典统计学理论结合评价实验场土壤表层盐分的空间分布特征及其变异性。用经典统计学理论确定了土壤盐分田间监测的合理采样数目与空间采样法则。在用地质统计学理论对变差函数理论模型最优性检验基础上，采用ＯＫ法对实验场表层土壤盐分空间分布进行了最优无偏估计。结果表明ＯＫ法用于内插估计精度较高；而用于外推估计精度略低，需对误差进行控制方可适当外推。以便利用样本对总体进行估计，并指导野外采样与监测。  相似文献   

上海农学院学术专著的统计与分析     

王春林 《上海交通大学学报(农业科学版)》1998,(3)

对上海农学院教师1978～1997年正式出版的76部专著进行了统计与分析。结果表明,学术专著的学科分布比较集中;专著出版的年限、时间跨度达18年;专著合著化程度较高,合著化率达77％;最后对如何进一步提高上海农学院学术专著的数量及质量,提出了相应的建议。  相似文献   

西南农业大学学报近5年载文统计与分析   总被引：3，自引：1，他引：2  

欧宾 《西南大学学报(自然科学版)》1999,21(3):299-302

采用文献计量学方法,统计分析了《西南农业大学学报》近５年的载文情况,对论文的学科分布,地区分布,退稿率,信息密度,出版周期,基金论文。作者情况等进行了研究,得出《西南农业大学学报》是侧重于西南地区的全国性农业科技期,论文质量在全国处于中等水平。  相似文献   

How to Report Exotic Animal Research     

《Veterinary Clinics of North America: Exotic Animal Practice》2017,20(3):997-1010

Abstracts should be clear, transparent, and sufficiently detailed to convey the main elements of the study, including the question, primary outcome measure, study design, and main conclusions.⁶ Abstracts may influence whether busy clinicians will read the full article, and, if a study is not open access, practitioners may need to make clinical decisions from abstracts only. Consider also that, with new technologies and means of accessing information, the abstract content alone may serve as the

Methods

The Methods section provides a detailed report of the what and the how of the described research process. However, in order to maximize reader comprehension and to permit repeatability of research, several methodological aspects need to be transparently reported (Table 2). Again, by clearly defining the type of study design, investigators can then refer to the appropriate reporting guideline and supporting materials for guidance. Even where aspects of trial design may have been suboptimal, use

Blinding

In research, there is often the need to blind (ie, to make people unaware) investigators (personnel and outcome assessors) and/or participants for several reasons (Table 4). When reporting any type of study, it should be made clear to readers which individuals were blinded, and to what. The use of terminology such as single, double, and triple blinding should be avoided because such terms can be variably interpreted and fail to explicitly explain blinding procedures.²⁹ The following categories

Participant Flow

It is highly recommended in all study designs to depict the flow of participants with a flow diagram (Fig. 1).6, 8 Information required to complete a flow diagram for a RCT, for example, includes the number of participants evaluated for potential enrollment into the trial and the number excluded at this stage because they either did not meet the inclusion criteria or declined to participate. For each intervention group it also requires the numbers of participants which were randomly assigned,

Discussion

The discussion reports the results of the study in the context of existing evidence.6, 8, 9 The investigators should cautiously interpret the results considering the objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence. In brief, the investigators should (1) summarize the results considering the study objectives; (2) discuss the limitations of the study, addressing sources of potential bias (both direction and magnitude), imprecision, and

Summary

This article discusses aspects of research reporting. Other than purely literary reporting, there is a multitude of other types of reporting deficiencies that increase research waste (Box 1). Awareness of such problems is the first step toward improvement.

  相似文献