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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11323324)

  • 1. Screening without a "gold standard": the Hui-Walter paradigm revisited.
    Johnson WO; Gastwirth JL; Pearson LM
    Am J Epidemiol; 2001 May; 153(9):921-4. PubMed ID: 11323324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bayesian sample size determination for prevalence and diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard test.
    Dendukuri N; Rahme E; Bélisle P; Joseph L
    Biometrics; 2004 Jun; 60(2):388-97. PubMed ID: 15180664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian sample size for diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard: Comparing identifiable with non-identifiable models.
    Dendukuri N; Bélisle P; Joseph L
    Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(26):2688-97. PubMed ID: 20803558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sample size determination for estimation of the accuracy of two conditionally independent tests in the absence of a gold standard.
    Georgiadis MP; Johnson WO; Gardner IA
    Prev Vet Med; 2005 Sep; 71(1-2):1-10. PubMed ID: 16076507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dual screening.
    Johnson WO; Pearson LM
    Biometrics; 1999 Sep; 55(3):867-73. PubMed ID: 11315019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Re: "Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard".
    Andersen S
    Am J Epidemiol; 1997 Feb; 145(3):290-1. PubMed ID: 9012602
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bayesian sample-size determination for inference on two binomial populations with no gold standard classifier.
    Stamey JD; Seaman JW; Young DM
    Stat Med; 2005 Oct; 24(19):2963-76. PubMed ID: 16007574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Estimation of prevalence on the basis of screening tests.
    Lew RA; Levy PS
    Stat Med; 1989 Oct; 8(10):1225-30. PubMed ID: 2814071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bayesian inference on prevalence using a missing-data approach with simulation-based techniques: applications to HIV screening.
    Mendoza-Blanco JR; Tu XM; Iyengar S
    Stat Med; 1996 Oct; 15(20):2161-76. PubMed ID: 8910961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard.
    Joseph L; Gyorkos TW; Coupal L
    Am J Epidemiol; 1995 Feb; 141(3):263-72. PubMed ID: 7840100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diagnostic test accuracy and prevalence inferences based on joint and sequential testing with finite population sampling.
    Su CL; Gardner IA; Johnson WO
    Stat Med; 2004 Jul; 23(14):2237-55. PubMed ID: 15236428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Estimating disease prevalence in the absence of a gold standard.
    Black MA; Craig BA
    Stat Med; 2002 Sep; 21(18):2653-69. PubMed ID: 12228883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Bayesian analysis of regression models with continuous errors with application to longitudinal studies.
    Broemeling LD; Cook P
    Stat Med; 1997 Feb; 16(4):321-32. PubMed ID: 9044523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluating Diagnostic Tests With Near-Perfect Specificity: Use of a Hui-Walter Approach When Designing a Trial of a DIVA Test for Bovine Tuberculosis.
    Rydevik G; Innocent GT; McKendrick IJ
    Front Vet Sci; 2018; 5():192. PubMed ID: 30159319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Bayesian approach to estimate and validate the false negative fraction in a two-stage multiple screening test.
    Held L; Ranyimbo AO
    Methods Inf Med; 2004; 43(5):461-4. PubMed ID: 15702201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Applying Bayesian analysis to evaluation of developmental screening.
    Camp BW
    J Dev Behav Pediatr; 2009 Dec; 30(6):583-92. PubMed ID: 19996904
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. MLE and Bayesian inference of age-dependent sensitivity and transition probability in periodic screening.
    Wu D; Rosner GL; Broemeling L
    Biometrics; 2005 Dec; 61(4):1056-63. PubMed ID: 16401279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bayesian inference in two-phase prevalence studies.
    Erkanli A; Soyer R; Stangl D
    Stat Med; 1997 May; 16(10):1121-33. PubMed ID: 9179978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessing the convergence of Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods: an example from evaluation of diagnostic tests in absence of a gold standard.
    Toft N; Innocent GT; Gettinby G; Reid SW
    Prev Vet Med; 2007 May; 79(2-4):244-56. PubMed ID: 17292499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard.
    Toft N; Jørgensen E; Højsgaard S
    Prev Vet Med; 2005 Apr; 68(1):19-33. PubMed ID: 15795013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.