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.
2. [Evaluation of diagnostic or screening procedures. Validity of tests, sensitivity, specificity, predictive values. Definition and indications for mass screening]. Durand-Zaleski I; Bastuji-Garin S Rev Prat; 2000 May; 50(10):1155-8. PubMed ID: 10905104 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The diagnostic utility of multiple-level likelihood ratios. Bowden SC; Loring DW J Int Neuropsychol Soc; 2009 Sep; 15(5):769-76. PubMed ID: 19635177 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessing the gain in diagnostic performance when combining two diagnostic tests. Macaskill P; Walter SD; Irwig L; Franco EL Stat Med; 2002 Sep; 21(17):2527-46. PubMed ID: 12205697 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reference values in medicine and validity of diagnostic test. Indrayan A; Satyanarayana L Indian Pediatr; 2000 Mar; 37(3):285-91. PubMed ID: 10750070 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Roaming through methodology. XXXII. False test results]. van der Weijden T; van den Akker M Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2001 May; 145(19):906-8. PubMed ID: 11387865 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Area under the ROC curve for a binary diagnostic test. Desbiens NA Med Decis Making; 2001; 21(5):421-2. PubMed ID: 11575492 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. A critique on contemporary reporting of likelihood ratios in test power analysis. Weissler AM; Bailey KR Mayo Clin Proc; 2004 Oct; 79(10):1317-8. PubMed ID: 15473417 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [The sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of diagnostic tests]. Rümke CL Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1983 Mar; 127(13):556-61. PubMed ID: 6843704 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The likelihood ratio. An improved measure for reporting and evaluating diagnostic test results. Radack KL; Rouan G; Hedges J Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1986 Aug; 110(8):689-93. PubMed ID: 3755325 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Studies about diagnostic tests: interpreting the results]. Salech F; Mery V; Larrondo F; Rada G Rev Med Chil; 2008 Sep; 136(9):1203-8. PubMed ID: 19030668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Computers in paediatrics. 18. Medical decision making: computer program to calculate sensitivity, specificity, false positive and negative rates, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy of a diagnostic test. Yip WC; Tay JS; Ho TF; Wong HB J Singapore Paediatr Soc; 1986; 28(1-2):74-8. PubMed ID: 3531721 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Number needed to misdiagnose: a measure of diagnostic test effectiveness. Habibzadeh F; Yadollahie M Epidemiology; 2013 Jan; 24(1):170. PubMed ID: 23232619 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. A primer on measures of treatment effectiveness and diagnostic test performance. Katz DA WMJ; 1999; 98(2):37-43. PubMed ID: 10235061 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Using evaluations of diagnostic tests: understanding their limitations and making the most of available evidence. Deeks JJ Ann Oncol; 1999 Jul; 10(7):761-8. PubMed ID: 10470421 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The predictive value of diagnostic procedures. Gelmann GR Nurse Pract; 1985 Mar; 10(3):25, 28-30, 32 passim. PubMed ID: 3982717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards. Hui SL; Zhou XH Stat Methods Med Res; 1998 Dec; 7(4):354-70. PubMed ID: 9871952 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. On uncertainty in medical testing. Winkler RL; Smith JE Med Decis Making; 2004; 24(6):654-8. PubMed ID: 15534345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]