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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17397855)

  • 1. Systematic errors in analytical measurement results.
    Hibbert DB
    J Chromatogr A; 2007 Jul; 1158(1-2):25-32. PubMed ID: 17397855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Treatment of bias in estimating measurement uncertainty.
    O'Donnell GE; Hibbert DB
    Analyst; 2005 May; 130(5):721-9. PubMed ID: 15852143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the residual liquid junction potential contribution to the uncertainty in pH measurement: a case study on low ionic strength natural waters.
    Kadis R; Leito I
    Anal Chim Acta; 2010 Apr; 664(2):129-35. PubMed ID: 20363394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The meaning of the bias uncertainty measure.
    Bartley DL
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2008 Aug; 52(6):519-25. PubMed ID: 18535088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accounting for both random errors and systematic errors in uncertainty propagation analysis of computer models involving experimental measurements with Monte Carlo methods.
    Vasquez VR; Whiting WB
    Risk Anal; 2005 Dec; 25(6):1669-81. PubMed ID: 16506991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Uncertainty evaluation in the chloroquine phosphate potentiometric titration: application of three different approaches.
    Rodomonte AL; Montinaro A; Bartolomei M
    J Pharm Biomed Anal; 2006 Sep; 42(1):56-63. PubMed ID: 16870384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A bottom-up approach in estimating the measurement uncertainty and other important considerations for quantitative analyses in drug testing for horses.
    Leung GN; Ho EN; Kwok WH; Leung DK; Tang FP; Wan TS; Wong AS; Wong CH; Wong JK; Yu NH
    J Chromatogr A; 2007 Sep; 1163(1-2):237-46. PubMed ID: 17628571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of insignificant bias and its uncertainty on the coverage probability of uncertainty intervals Part 1. Evaluation for a given value of the true bias.
    Synek V
    Talanta; 2006 Dec; 70(5):1024-34. PubMed ID: 18970877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Empirical evaluation showed that the Copas selection model provided a useful summary in 80% of meta-analyses.
    Carpenter JR; Schwarzer G; Rücker G; Künstler R
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Jun; 62(6):624-631.e4. PubMed ID: 19282148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of insignificant bias and its uncertainty on the coverage probability of uncertainty intervals Part 2. Evaluation for a found insignificant experimental bias.
    Synek V
    Talanta; 2007 Feb; 71(3):1304-11. PubMed ID: 19071450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Uncertainty in liquid chromatographic analysis of pharmaceutical product: influence of various uncertainty sources.
    Leito S; Mölder K; Künnapas A; Herodes K; Leito I
    J Chromatogr A; 2006 Jul; 1121(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 16756985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bias in analytical chemistry: A review of selected procedures for incorporating uncorrected bias into the expanded uncertainty of analytical measurements and a graphical method for evaluating the concordance of reference and test procedures.
    Frenkel R; Farrance I; Badrick T
    Clin Chim Acta; 2019 Aug; 495():129-138. PubMed ID: 30935874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Bayesian decision threshold, detection limit and confidence limits in ionising-radiation measurement.
    Weise K; Hübel K; Rose E; Schläger M; Schrammel D; Täschner M; Michel R
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 121(1):52-63. PubMed ID: 16868015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Recommendations for expressing uncertainty of measurement of quantitative results in laboratory medicine].
    Giroud C; Dumontet M; Vassault A; Braconnier F; Férard G;
    Ann Biol Clin (Paris); 2007; 65(2):185-200. PubMed ID: 17353174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of methods for the estimation of measurement uncertainty for an analytical method for sulphonamides.
    Dabalus Islam M; Schweikert Turcu M; Cannavan A
    Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess; 2008 Dec; 25(12):1439-50. PubMed ID: 19680854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Treatment of uncorrected measurement bias in uncertainty estimation for chemical measurements.
    Magnusson B; Ellison SL
    Anal Bioanal Chem; 2008 Jan; 390(1):201-13. PubMed ID: 18026721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Determination of illicit drugs in seized materials: role of sampling and analysis in estimation of measurement uncertainty.
    Zamengo L; Frison G; Gregio M; Orrù G; Sciarrone R
    Forensic Sci Int; 2011 May; 208(1-3):108-23. PubMed ID: 21159455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Improved evaluation of measurement uncertainty from sampling by inclusion of between-sampler bias using sampling proficiency testing.
    Ramsey MH; Geelhoed B; Wood R; Damant AP
    Analyst; 2011 Apr; 136(7):1313-21. PubMed ID: 21279235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Complete equation for the measurement of organic molecules using stable isotope labeled internal standards, exact matching, and mass spectrometry.
    Burke DG; Mackay LG
    Anal Chem; 2008 Jul; 80(13):5071-8. PubMed ID: 18517220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Bayesian modeling of measurement errors and pesticide concentration in dietary risk assessments.
    Kennedy M; Hart A
    Risk Anal; 2009 Oct; 29(10):1427-42. PubMed ID: 19645757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.