365 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19499551)
1. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: alternative parameterizations and model selection.
Chu H; Nie L; Cole SR; Poole C
Stat Med; 2009 Aug; 28(18):2384-99. PubMed ID: 19499551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies using individual patient data and aggregate data.
Riley RD; Dodd SR; Craig JV; Thompson JR; Williamson PR
Stat Med; 2008 Dec; 27(29):6111-36. PubMed ID: 18816508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test data: a bivariate Bayesian modeling approach.
Verde PE
Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(30):3088-102. PubMed ID: 21170904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves.
Arends LR; Hamza TH; van Houwelingen JC; Heijenbrok-Kal MH; Hunink MG; Stijnen T
Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(5):621-38. PubMed ID: 18591542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Identifiability of models for multiple diagnostic testing in the absence of a gold standard.
Jones G; Johnson WO; Hanson TE; Christensen R
Biometrics; 2010 Sep; 66(3):855-63. PubMed ID: 19764953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies with multiple thresholds using survival methods.
Putter H; Fiocco M; Stijnen T
Biom J; 2010 Feb; 52(1):95-110. PubMed ID: 19924701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Robust combination of multiple diagnostic tests for classifying censored event times.
Cai T; Cheng S
Biostatistics; 2008 Apr; 9(2):216-33. PubMed ID: 18056687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Differences between univariate and bivariate models for summarizing diagnostic accuracy may not be large.
Simel DL; Bossuyt PM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Dec; 62(12):1292-300. PubMed ID: 19447007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews.
Reitsma JB; Glas AS; Rutjes AW; Scholten RJ; Bossuyt PM; Zwinderman AH
J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Oct; 58(10):982-90. PubMed ID: 16168343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Repeated-measures modeling improved comparison of diagnostic tests in meta-analysis of dependent studies.
Siadaty MS; Philbrick JT; Heim SW; Schectman JM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Jul; 57(7):698-711. PubMed ID: 15358397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Diagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence-based diagnosis.
Leeflang MM; Bossuyt PM; Irwig L
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Jan; 62(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 18778913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A hybrid Bayesian hierarchical model combining cohort and case-control studies for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: Accounting for partial verification bias.
Ma X; Chen Y; Cole SR; Chu H
Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Dec; 25(6):3015-3037. PubMed ID: 24862512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prevalence-dependent diagnostic accuracy measures.
Li J; Fine JP; Safdar N
Stat Med; 2007 Jul; 26(17):3258-73. PubMed ID: 17212380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Proportional odds ratio model for comparison of diagnostic tests in meta-analysis.
Siadaty MS; Shu J
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2004 Dec; 4(1):27. PubMed ID: 15588327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Hierarchical models for ROC curve summary measures: design and analysis of multi-reader, multi-modality studies of medical tests.
Wang F; Gatsonis CA
Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(2):243-56. PubMed ID: 17340598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Bayesian sample size determination for prevalence and diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard test.
Dendukuri N; Rahme E; Bélisle P; Joseph L
Biometrics; 2004 Jun; 60(2):388-97. PubMed ID: 15180664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The utility of prior information and stratification for parameter estimation with two screening tests but no gold standard.
Gustafson P
Stat Med; 2005 Apr; 24(8):1203-17. PubMed ID: 15558709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Confidence intervals for predictive values with an emphasis to case-control studies.
Mercaldo ND; Lau KF; Zhou XH
Stat Med; 2007 May; 26(10):2170-83. PubMed ID: 16927452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Empirical Bayes estimates generated in a hierarchical summary ROC analysis agreed closely with those of a full Bayesian analysis.
Macaskill P
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Sep; 57(9):925-32. PubMed ID: 15504635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The conditional relative odds ratio provided less biased results for comparing diagnostic test accuracy in meta-analyses.
Suzuki S; Moro-oka T; Choudhry NK
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 May; 57(5):461-9. PubMed ID: 15196616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
