Report an error
Master's degrees awarded in Health professions and related programs correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The distance between Neptune and Uranus | r=1 | 10yrs | No |
USA Population | r=1 | 10yrs | No |
US production of cheese (other than cottage cheese) | r=1 | 10yrs | No |
Google searches for 'reddit' | r=1 | 10yrs | Yes! |
Electricity generation in Senegal | r=1 | 10yrs | No |
Solar power generated in Malta | r=1 | 10yrs | No |
Average milk produced per cow in the US | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
American cheese consumption | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
Google searches for 'tummy ache' | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
Gender pay gap in the U.S. | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
Average number of comments on Mark Rober YouTube videos | r=0.98 | 10yrs | No |
US GDP per capita | r=0.98 | 10yrs | No |
US Rice Consumption | r=0.87 | 10yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Health professions and related programs also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)