Open Access
Table 1
Comparisons between peaks of MDF from this study and those from previous literature, where the parentheses indicate the
| Literature | Peaks | Number |
|---|---|---|
| This work | –0.66, –0.52, –0.35, –0.11, 0.15, 0.33 (scipy. signal. find_peaks) | 7156 |
| This work | –0.67, –0.49, –0.28, –0.08, 0.16, 0.36 (GMM) | 7156 |
| Uttenthaler et al. (2012) | –0.6, 0.3 (corrected MDF using bootstrapping) | 401 |
| Zoccali et al. (2008) | –0.7, –0.3, 0.3 (Gaussians; one zone model) | 650 |
| Johnson et al. (2013) | –0.44, –0.29, –0.08 (0.1 dex binning) | 264 |
| Ness et al. (2013a) | –0.70 ~ –0.67, –0.27 ~ –0.22,0.13 ~ 0.16 (Bayesian; GMM) | \ |
| Schultheis et al. (2017) | –0.29, 0.30 (GMM) | 269 |
| Hill et al. (2011) | –0.30, 0.32 (kernel estimation) | 219 |
| Rojas-Arriagada et al. (2017) | –0.36 ± 0.08, 0.40 ± 0.05 (GMM) | 1583 |
| Zoccali et al. (2018) | <–0.8, –0.4, 0.3 (GMM) | 5500 |
| Wylie et al. (2021) | –0.50 ~ –0.40, ~ 0.30 (corrected MDF) | \ |
| Johnson et al. (2022) | ~–0.30, ~0.20 (fields binning) | \ |
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.