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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18753693)

  • 1. The impact of data collection design, linking method, and sample size on vertical scaling using the Rasch model.
    Paek I; Young MJ; Yi Q
    J Appl Meas; 2008; 9(3):229-48. PubMed ID: 18753693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Rasch fit statistics as a test of the invariance of item parameter estimates.
    Smith RM; Suh KK
    J Appl Meas; 2003; 4(2):153-63. PubMed ID: 12748407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Expected linking error resulting from item parameter drift among the common Items on Rasch calibrated tests.
    Miller GE; Gesn PR; Rotou J
    J Appl Meas; 2005; 6(1):48-56. PubMed ID: 15701943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Equating and item banking with the Rasch model.
    Wolfe EW
    J Appl Meas; 2000; 1(4):409-34. PubMed ID: 12077465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing concurrent versus fixed parameter equating with common items: using the dichotomous and partial credit models in a mixed-item format test.
    Taherbhai HM; Seo DY
    J Appl Meas; 2007; 8(1):84-96. PubMed ID: 17215567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Expanding an existing multiple choice test with a mixed format test: simulation study on sample size and item recovery in concurrent calibration.
    Paek I; Young MJ
    J Appl Meas; 2006; 7(4):394-406. PubMed ID: 17068379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Equating designs and procedures used in Rasch scaling.
    Skaggs G; Wolfe EW
    J Appl Meas; 2010; 11(2):182-95. PubMed ID: 20693702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Parameter recovery for the rating scale model using PARSCALE.
    French GA; Dodd BG
    J Outcome Meas; 1999; 3(2):176-99. PubMed ID: 10204326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of several methods for analyzing censored data.
    Hewett P; Ganser GH
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2007 Oct; 51(7):611-32. PubMed ID: 17940277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of item redundancy on Rasch item and person estimates.
    Smith EV
    J Appl Meas; 2005; 6(2):147-63. PubMed ID: 15795483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Binary items and beyond: a simulation of computer adaptive testing using the Rasch partial credit model.
    Lange R
    J Appl Meas; 2008; 9(1):81-104. PubMed ID: 18180552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Pre-equating: a simulation study based on a large scale assessment model.
    Taherbhai HM; Young MJ
    J Appl Meas; 2004; 5(3):301-18. PubMed ID: 15243175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Monte Carlo study of the impact of missing data and differential item functioning on theta estimates from two polytomous Rasch family models.
    Furlow CF; Fouladi RT; Gagne P; Whittaker TA
    J Appl Meas; 2007; 8(4):388-403. PubMed ID: 18250525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of sample size for estimating Rasch/IRT parameters with dichotomous items.
    Stone M; Yumoto F
    J Appl Meas; 2004; 5(1):48-61. PubMed ID: 14757991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The influence of equating methodology on reported trends in PISA.
    Gebhardt E; Adams RJ
    J Appl Meas; 2007; 8(3):305-22. PubMed ID: 17804896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Estimating the probability that the sample mean is within a desired fraction of the standard deviation of the true mean.
    Schillaci MA; Schillaci ME
    J Hum Evol; 2009 Feb; 56(2):134-8. PubMed ID: 19054544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An experimental study using Rasch analysis to compare absolute magnitude estimation and categorical rating scaling as applied in survey research.
    Koskey KL; Sondergeld TA; Beltyukova SA; Fox CM
    J Appl Meas; 2013; 14(3):262-81. PubMed ID: 23816614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Balanced two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.
    Ye F; Shyr Y
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(5):514-24. PubMed ID: 17942467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Guidelines for statistical analysis of percentage of syllables stuttered data.
    Jones M; Onslow M; Packman A; Gebski V
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Aug; 49(4):867-78. PubMed ID: 16908881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model.
    Smith RM; Schumacker RE; Bush MJ
    J Outcome Meas; 1998; 2(1):66-78. PubMed ID: 9661732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.