147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16161803)
1. Comparing the likelihood ratios of two binary diagnostic tests in the presence of partial verification.
Roldán Nofuentes JA; Luna del Castillo JD
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):442-57. PubMed ID: 16161803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Approximate confidence intervals for the likelihood ratios of a binary diagnostic test in the presence of partial disease verification.
Montero-Alonso MA; Roldán-Nofuentes JA
J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(1):56-81. PubMed ID: 29584541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Measurement error and confidence intervals for ROC curves.
Tosteson TD; Buonaccorsi JP; Demidenko E; Wells WA
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):409-16. PubMed ID: 16161800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measuring and estimating diagnostic accuracy when there are three ordinal diagnostic groups.
Xiong C; van Belle G; Miller JP; Morris JC
Stat Med; 2006 Apr; 25(7):1251-73. PubMed ID: 16345029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A parametric comparison of diagnostic accuracy with three ordinal diagnostic groups.
Xiong C; van Belle G; Miller JP; Yan Y; Gao F; Yu K; Morris JC
Biom J; 2007 Aug; 49(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17763377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Compbdt: an R program to compare two binary diagnostic tests subject to a paired design.
Roldán-Nofuentes JA
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Jun; 20(1):143. PubMed ID: 32503431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of the likelihood ratios of two binary diagnostic tests in paired designs.
Nofuentes JA; Del Castillo Jde D
Stat Med; 2007 Sep; 26(22):4179-201. PubMed ID: 17357992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Use of likelihood ratios for comparisons of binary diagnostic tests: underlying ROC curves.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):5821-30. PubMed ID: 21158294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Adjusting for non-ignorable verification bias in clinical studies for Alzheimer's disease.
Zhou XH; Castelluccio P
Stat Med; 2004 Jan; 23(2):221-30. PubMed ID: 14716724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Inverse probability weighting estimation of the volume under the ROC surface in the presence of verification bias.
Zhang Y; Alonzo TA;
Biom J; 2016 Nov; 58(6):1338-1356. PubMed ID: 27338713
[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. A Bayesian hierarchical non-linear regression model in receiver operating characteristic analysis of clustered continuous diagnostic data.
Zou KH; O'Malley AJ
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):417-27. PubMed ID: 16161801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Determining sample size for a binary diagnostic test in the presence of verification bias.
Shan G; Zhang H; Jiang T
J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(6):1193-1202. PubMed ID: 29553878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Estimation of the ROC curve under verification bias.
Fluss R; Reiser B; Faraggi D; Rotnitzky A
Biom J; 2009 Jun; 51(3):475-90. PubMed ID: 19588455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A model for adjusting for nonignorable verification bias in estimation of the ROC curve and its area with likelihood-based approach.
Liu D; Zhou XH
Biometrics; 2010 Dec; 66(4):1119-28. PubMed ID: 20222937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point.
Fluss R; Faraggi D; Reiser B
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):458-72. PubMed ID: 16161804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Power calculation for comparing diagnostic accuracies in a multi-reader, multi-test design.
Kim E; Zhang Z; Wang Y; Zeng D
Biometrics; 2014 Dec; 70(4):1033-41. PubMed ID: 25355470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Youden Index and the optimal cut-point corrected for measurement error.
Perkins NJ; Schisterman EF
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):428-41. PubMed ID: 16161802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
