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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1876777)

  • 1. A statistical procedure for the estimation of accuracy parameters in interlaboratory studies.
    Kristiansen S
    Stat Med; 1991 Jun; 10(6):843-52; discussion 852-4. PubMed ID: 1876777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use of prediction methods to assess laboratory bias and mean values associated with an interlaboratory study for method validation and/or proficiency testing.
    McClure FD; Lee JK
    J AOAC Int; 2014; 97(2):624-9. PubMed ID: 24830176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variances and uncertainties of the sample laboratory-to-laboratory variance (S(L)2) and standard deviation (S(L)) associated with an interlaboratory study.
    McClure FD; Lee JK
    J AOAC Int; 2012; 95(1):244-51. PubMed ID: 22468367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Closed-form confidence intervals on measures of precision for an interlaboratory study.
    Nijhuis MB; van den Heuvel ER
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(1):123-42. PubMed ID: 17219759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Estimation of reproducibility and repeatability in microbiological ring trials--robust versus conservative methods].
    Schmitz R; Weiss H; Wilrich PT
    Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr; 2005; 118(9-10):410-5. PubMed ID: 16206930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Set-up and evaluation of interlaboratory studies.
    Vander Heyden Y; Smeyers-Verbeke J
    J Chromatogr A; 2007 Jul; 1158(1-2):158-67. PubMed ID: 17339041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Interpretation of interlaboratory trials based on accuracy profiles.
    Feinberg M; Granier G; Mermet JM
    J AOAC Int; 2010; 93(2):725-33. PubMed ID: 20480921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Reliability of precision data obtained from interlaboratory studies.
    Uhlig S; Eichler S; Gowik P
    J AOAC Int; 2013; 96(2):466-70. PubMed ID: 23767375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of model misspecification in the estimation of variance components and intraclass correlation for paired data.
    Lyles RH; Chambless LE
    Stat Med; 1995 Aug; 14(15):1693-706. PubMed ID: 7481204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A statistical evaluation of the Youden Matched-Pairs Procedure.
    McClure FD
    J AOAC Int; 1999; 82(2):375-83. PubMed ID: 10191544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Multilevel bootstrap analysis with assumptions violated.
    Vallejo Seco G; Ato García M; Fernández García MP; Livacic Rojas PE
    Psicothema; 2013; 25(4):520-8. PubMed ID: 24124787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Statistics of interlaboratory in vitro toxicological studies.
    Hothorn LA
    Altern Lab Anim; 2003 Jun; 31 Suppl 1():43-63. PubMed ID: 15595900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Residual Normality Assumption and the Estimation of Multiple Membership Random Effects Models.
    Chen J; Leroux AJ
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2018; 53(6):898-913. PubMed ID: 30521398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Uncertainties of method performance statistics based on a balanced completely randomized model interlaboratory study.
    McClure FD; Lee JK
    J AOAC Int; 2008; 91(3):660-9. PubMed ID: 18567314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reflection on modern methods: demystifying robust standard errors for epidemiologists.
    Mansournia MA; Nazemipour M; Naimi AI; Collins GS; Campbell MJ
    Int J Epidemiol; 2021 Mar; 50(1):346-351. PubMed ID: 33351919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. NIST/NCI Micronutrients Measurement Quality Assurance Program: measurement repeatabilities and reproducibilities for fat-soluble vitamin-related compounds in human sera.
    Duewer DL; Thomas JB; Kline MC; MacCrehan WA; Schaffer R; Sharpless KE; May WE; Crowell JA
    Anal Chem; 1997 Apr; 69(7):1406-13. PubMed ID: 9105181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accuracy and repeatability of weighing for occupational hygiene measurements: results from an inter-laboratory comparison.
    Stacey P; Revell G; Tylee B
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2002 Nov; 46(8):693-9. PubMed ID: 12406863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Regression models for censored serological data.
    Kafatos G; Andrews N; McConway KJ; Farrington P
    J Med Microbiol; 2013 Jan; 62(Pt 1):93-100. PubMed ID: 23002068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Proficiency test for chemical laboratories for the analysis of a pesticide in a formulated product: interlaboratory study.
    Sanyal D; Rani A
    J AOAC Int; 2009; 92(1):271-8. PubMed ID: 19382586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Interlaboratory comparison of olfactometry in Japan.
    Higuchi T; Masuda J
    Water Sci Technol; 2004; 50(4):147-52. PubMed ID: 15484755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.