These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10766505)
41. Measurement errors in caries diagnosis: some further latent class models. Formann AK Biometrics; 1994 Sep; 50(3):865-71. PubMed ID: 7981408 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Interrater agreement of visual analysis in single-subject decisions: quantitative review and analysis. Ottenbacher KJ Am J Ment Retard; 1993 Jul; 98(1):135-42. PubMed ID: 8373565 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Assessing the influence of rater and subject characteristics on measures of agreement for ordinal ratings. Nelson KP; Mitani AA; Edwards D Stat Med; 2017 Sep; 36(20):3181-3199. PubMed ID: 28612356 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Random marginal agreement coefficients: rethinking the adjustment for chance when measuring agreement. Fay MP Biostatistics; 2005 Jan; 6(1):171-80. PubMed ID: 15618535 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. EasyDIAg: A tool for easy determination of interrater agreement. Holle H; Rein R Behav Res Methods; 2015 Sep; 47(3):837-47. PubMed ID: 25106813 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Statistical description of interrater variability in ordinal ratings. Nelson JC; Pepe MS Stat Methods Med Res; 2000 Oct; 9(5):475-96. PubMed ID: 11191261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Assessing and quantifying inter-rater variation for dichotomous ratings using a Rasch model. Petersen JH; Larsen K; Kreiner S Stat Methods Med Res; 2012 Dec; 21(6):635-52. PubMed ID: 21177706 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Specific agreement on ordinal and multiple nominal outcomes can be calculated for more than two raters. de Vet HCW; Mullender MG; Eekhout I J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Apr; 96():47-53. PubMed ID: 29217452 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. A new permutation-based method for assessing agreement between two observers making replicated binary readings. Pan Y; Haber M; Barnhart HX Stat Med; 2011 Apr; 30(8):839-53. PubMed ID: 21432878 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Statistical methods in epidemiology. v. Towards an understanding of the kappa coefficient. Rigby AS Disabil Rehabil; 2000 May; 22(8):339-44. PubMed ID: 10896093 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Modelling covariate effects in observer agreement studies: the case of nominal scale agreement. Graham P Stat Med; 1995 Feb; 14(3):299-310. PubMed ID: 7724915 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Specific agreement on dichotomous outcomes can be calculated for more than two raters. de Vet HCW; Dikmans RE; Eekhout I J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Mar; 83():85-89. PubMed ID: 28088591 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Modelling patterns of agreement and disagreement. Agresti A Stat Methods Med Res; 1992; 1(2):201-18. PubMed ID: 1341658 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Higher-order kappa-type statistics for a dichotomous attribute in multiple ratings. Lau T Biometrics; 1993 Jun; 49(2):535-42. PubMed ID: 8369387 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Evaluating the effects of rater and subject factors on measures of association. Nelson KP; Mitani AA; Edwards D Biom J; 2018 May; 60(3):639-656. PubMed ID: 29349801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]