206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10966555)
1. Comparison of artificial neural networks with logistic regression in prediction of in-hospital death after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.
Freeman RV; Eagle KA; Bates ER; Werns SW; Kline-Rogers E; Karavite D; Moscucci M
Am Heart J; 2000 Sep; 140(3):511-20. PubMed ID: 10966555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Toronto score for in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions.
Chowdhary S; Ivanov J; Mackie K; Seidelin PH; Dzavík V
Am Heart J; 2009 Jan; 157(1):156-63. PubMed ID: 19081413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Limitations of current risk-adjustment models in the era of coronary stenting.
Kizer JR; Berlin JA; Laskey WK; Schwartz JS; Sauer WH; Krone RJ; Kimmel SE
Am Heart J; 2003 Apr; 145(4):683-92. PubMed ID: 12679766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Serious renal dysfunction after percutaneous coronary interventions can be predicted.
Brown JR; DeVries JT; Piper WD; Robb JF; Hearne MJ; Ver Lee PM; Kellet MA; Watkins MW; Ryan TJ; Silver MT; Ross CS; MacKenzie TA; O'Connor GT; Malenka DJ;
Am Heart J; 2008 Feb; 155(2):260-6. PubMed ID: 18215595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [The comparison of logistic regression model selection methods for the prediction of coronary artery disease].
Colak C; Colak MC; Orman MN
Anadolu Kardiyol Derg; 2007 Mar; 7(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 17347067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison between logistic regression and neural networks to predict death in patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency room.
Jaimes F; Farbiarz J; Alvarez D; Martínez C
Crit Care; 2005 Apr; 9(2):R150-6. PubMed ID: 15774048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An Australian risk prediction model for 30-day mortality after isolated coronary artery bypass: the AusSCORE.
Reid C; Billah B; Dinh D; Smith J; Skillington P; Yii M; Seevanayagam S; Mohajeri M; Shardey G
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2009 Oct; 138(4):904-10. PubMed ID: 19660369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. External validation of established risk adjustment models for procedural complications after percutaneous coronary intervention.
Kunadian B; Dunning J; Das R; Roberts AP; Morley R; Turley AJ; Twomey D; Hall JA; Wright RA; Sutton AG; Muir DF; de Belder MA
Heart; 2008 Aug; 94(8):1012-8. PubMed ID: 18032457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Risk factor identification and mortality prediction in cardiac surgery using artificial neural networks.
Nilsson J; Ohlsson M; Thulin L; Höglund P; Nashef SA; Brandt J
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2006 Jul; 132(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 16798296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. External validation of a percutaneous coronary intervention mortality prediction model in patients with acute coronary syndromes.
Hubacek J; Galbraith PD; Gao M; Humphries K; Graham MM; Knudtson ML; Ghali WA;
Am Heart J; 2006 Feb; 151(2):308-15. PubMed ID: 16442892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison between neural networks and multiple logistic regression to predict acute coronary syndrome in the emergency room.
Green M; Björk J; Forberg J; Ekelund U; Edenbrandt L; Ohlsson M
Artif Intell Med; 2006 Nov; 38(3):305-18. PubMed ID: 16962295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression models for prediction of mortality in head trauma based on initial clinical data.
Eftekhar B; Mohammad K; Ardebili HE; Ghodsi M; Ketabchi E
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2005 Feb; 5():3. PubMed ID: 15713231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A global goodness-of-fit test for receiver operating characteristic curve analysis via the bootstrap method.
Zou KH; Resnic FS; Talos IF; Goldberg-Zimring D; Bhagwat JG; Haker SJ; Kikinis R; Jolesz FA; Ohno-Machado L
J Biomed Inform; 2005 Oct; 38(5):395-403. PubMed ID: 16198998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A comparison of performance of mathematical predictive methods for medical diagnosis: identifying acute cardiac ischemia among emergency department patients.
Selker HP; Griffith JL; Patil S; Long WJ; D'Agostino RB
J Investig Med; 1995 Oct; 43(5):468-76. PubMed ID: 8528758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Logistic versus additive EuroSCORE. A comparative assessment of the two models in an independent population sample.
Zingone B; Pappalardo A; Dreas L
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2004 Dec; 26(6):1134-40. PubMed ID: 15541974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Application of artificial neural networks to establish a predictive mortality risk model in children admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit.
Chan CH; Chan EY; Ng DK; Chow PY; Kwok KL
Singapore Med J; 2006 Nov; 47(11):928-34. PubMed ID: 17075658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validating the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program risk model for percutaneous coronary intervention.
Wu Y; Jin R; Grunkemeier GL
Am Heart J; 2006 Jun; 151(6):1276-80. PubMed ID: 16781236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV: hospital mortality assessment for today's critically ill patients.
Zimmerman JE; Kramer AA; McNair DS; Malila FM
Crit Care Med; 2006 May; 34(5):1297-310. PubMed ID: 16540951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Adjusting for patient differences in predicting hospital mortality for percutaneous coronary interventions in the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program.
Maynard C; Goss JR; Malenka DJ; Reisman M;
Am Heart J; 2003 Apr; 145(4):658-64. PubMed ID: 12679762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Predicting major adverse cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention: the Texas Heart Institute risk score.
Madan P; Elayda MA; Lee VV; Wilson JM
Am Heart J; 2008 Jun; 155(6):1068-74. PubMed ID: 18513521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
