c# remove text from pdf

Changing existing text in a PDF using iText – Sampath LK – Medium
14 Oct 2016 ... Last few days I was trying to modify some PDF file using iText library. ... So my first try was to replace the existing text with dynamic data. I…

c# remove text from pdf

Read PDF Text , Merge pages and Delete pages in ASP.Net using ...
Read and extract searched text from pdf file using iTextSharp in ASP.Net · How to read pdf ... Append merge PDF Documents in C# . 3. Deleting ...

overfactored in most of his landmark factor-analytic studies of Wechsler s scales, and Wechsler attempted to assign clinical meaning to statistical artifacts. Wechsler was a consummate clinician who developed the Wechsler-Bellevue as a clinical tool to be used for measuring cognition within the broader domain of personality. However, the fact that Cohen overfactored and Wechsler overinterpreted WAIS dimensions should not impel researchers or clinicians to take a position that is diametrically opposite. Yet, that is exactly what some professionals have done in arguing strenuously that Wechsler s scales are nothing but one-factor instruments (e.g., O Grady, 1983). Reducing the WAIS-III to a one-score instrument and cautioning clinicians to beware of the separate Verbal and Performance IQs because of their statistical overlap, which makes it not surprising that both researchers...and practitioners...have been unable to employ a Verbal Performance discrepancy index with any degree of power as a diagnostic tool (O Grady, 1983, p. 830), effectively cripples clinical artistry. As Leckliter, Matarazzo, and Silverstein (1986) stress, the main reason for factor-analyzing a Wechsler battery is to provide the basis for hypothesis testing by the examiner (p. 341). With that as a rationale, the real issue is whether the WAIS-III is best interpreted as a two-, three-, or a four-factor test battery.

The data we have presented thus far in this chapter have shown that the one-factor model of the WAIS-III is not the best statistical fit. However, the two-, three-, and four-factor models all seem to have some merit. The confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analyses (Psychological Corporation, 1997; Ward et al., 2000) compared and contrasted various multiple-factor models of the

Learn about another MSN content partnership with Ticketmaster in Secret #66.

WAIS-III to determine which was the most statistically sound and clinically useful (see Tables 71 and 72) In the total sample, as well as across most of the five age groups studied, The Psychological Corporation (1997) found significant successive improvements in model fit moving from two to three to four factors The conclusion was that the four-factor model best fits the data for the total sample and most age groups Ward et al (2000) found that the three-factor models statistically fit better than the two-factor model; however, the advantage was very minimal An important observation made by Ward et al was that their alternative two-factor model, which assigns the three Working Memory subtests to the Performance Scale (see Table 72, Model 2B) afforded a better fit in the younger groups than did the traditional dichotomy of Verbal Performance subtests.