This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ALAN E. TRELOAR, Ph.D.

Arch Intern Med. 1940;66(4):848-850.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

A discussion of the range of normal blood pressures has been presented recently by Robinson and Brucer.¹ The authors have wisely emphasized the need for more accurate standards in judging the normality of any blood pressure level shown on clinical examination. In the paper of reference they essayed to provide such standards, based on "an exhaustive statistical study of 7,478 men and 3,405 women selected at random." Disregarding the possible clinical soundness of their deductions, it cannot be agreed that their method of analysis of the data is statistically sound. The study appears to have been characterized both by biased selection of the basic data and by application of frequency curve probablity values to distributions which certainly do not follow the function used. It is the purpose of this note merely to point out a few of the statistical errors that affect the validity of the conclusions. Unfortunately mere . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
MINNEAPOLIS

From the Division of Biostatistics, Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Minnesota.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?