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 *

189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12820281)

  • 1. Evaluating medical diagnostic tests at the subunit level in the presence of verification bias.
    Barnhart HX; Kosinski AS
    Stat Med; 2003 Jul; 22(13):2161-76. PubMed ID: 12820281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Adjusting for verification bias in diagnostic test evaluation: a Bayesian approach.
    Buzoianu M; Kadane JB
    Stat Med; 2008 Jun; 27(13):2453-73. PubMed ID: 17979150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A global sensitivity analysis of performance of a medical diagnostic test when verification bias is present.
    Kosinski AS; Barnhart HX
    Stat Med; 2003 Sep; 22(17):2711-21. PubMed ID: 12939781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accounting for nonignorable verification bias in assessment of diagnostic tests.
    Kosinski AS; Barnhart HX
    Biometrics; 2003 Mar; 59(1):163-71. PubMed ID: 12762453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of weighted kappa coefficients of multiple binary diagnostic tests done on the same subjects.
    Roldán Nofuentes JA; Luna del Castillo JD
    Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(20):2149-65. PubMed ID: 20809538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Multiple imputation to correct for partial verification bias revisited.
    de Groot JA; Janssen KJ; Zwinderman AH; Moons KG; Reitsma JB
    Stat Med; 2008 Dec; 27(28):5880-9. PubMed ID: 18752256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Verification bias-corrected estimators of the relative true and false positive rates of two binary screening tests.
    Alonzo TA
    Stat Med; 2005 Feb; 24(3):403-17. PubMed ID: 15543634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methods for evaluating the performance of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard: a latent class model approach.
    Garrett ES; Eaton WW; Zeger S
    Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(9):1289-307. PubMed ID: 12111879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Bayesian approach to simultaneously adjusting for verification and reference standard bias in diagnostic test studies.
    Lu Y; Dendukuri N; Schiller I; Joseph L
    Stat Med; 2010 Oct; 29(24):2532-43. PubMed ID: 20799249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of predictive values of two diagnostic tests from the same sample of subjects using weighted least squares.
    Wang W; Davis CS; Soong SJ
    Stat Med; 2006 Jul; 25(13):2215-29. PubMed ID: 16220470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bayesian estimation for performance measures of two diagnostic tests in the presence of verification bias.
    Aragon DC; Martinez EZ; Achcar JA
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 Jul; 20(4):821-34. PubMed ID: 20496208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Nonparametric estimation of ROC curves in the absence of a gold standard.
    Zhou XH; Castelluccio P; Zhou C
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):600-9. PubMed ID: 16011710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Insights into latent class analysis of diagnostic test performance.
    Pepe MS; Janes H
    Biostatistics; 2007 Apr; 8(2):474-84. PubMed ID: 17085745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessing accuracy of mammography in the presence of verification bias and intrareader correlation.
    Zheng Y; Barlow WE; Cutter G
    Biometrics; 2005 Mar; 61(1):259-68. PubMed ID: 15737102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Criteria for evaluating the performance and utility of a diagnostic test].
    Mancini J; Gaudart J; Giorgi R
    Med Trop (Mars); 2009 Feb; 69(1):78-82. PubMed ID: 19499742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Some issues in resolution of diagnostic tests using an imperfect gold standard.
    Hawkins DM; Garrett JA; Stephenson B
    Stat Med; 2001 Jul; 20(13):1987-2001. PubMed ID: 11427955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Study design for the evaluation of diagnostic tests.
    Daya S
    Semin Reprod Endocrinol; 1996 May; 14(2):101-9. PubMed ID: 8796932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of combined cardiac positron emission tomography and coronary computed tomography angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease.
    Adams GL; Trimble MA; Brosnan RB; Russo CA; Rusband D; Honeycutt EF; Shaw LK; Hurwitz LM; Turkington TG; Hanson MW; Pagnanelli RA; Borges-Neto S
    Nucl Med Commun; 2008 Jul; 29(7):593-8. PubMed ID: 18528180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An ROC-type measure of diagnostic accuracy when the gold standard is continuous-scale.
    Obuchowski NA
    Stat Med; 2006 Feb; 25(3):481-93. PubMed ID: 16287217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Weighted 2 x 2 kappa coefficients: recommended indices of diagnostic accuracy for evidence-based practice.
    Gilchrist JM
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Oct; 62(10):1045-53. PubMed ID: 19278830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.