184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19651450)
1. On the interpretation of test sensitivity in the two-test two-population problem: assumptions matter.
Johnson WO; Gardner IA; Metoyer CN; Branscum AJ
Prev Vet Med; 2009 Oct; 91(2-4):116-21. PubMed ID: 19651450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard.
Toft N; Jørgensen E; Højsgaard S
Prev Vet Med; 2005 Apr; 68(1):19-33. PubMed ID: 15795013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using pseudogold standards and latent-class analysis in combination to evaluate the accuracy of three diagnostic tests.
Nérette P; Stryhn H; Dohoo I; Hammell L
Prev Vet Med; 2008 Jul; 85(3-4):207-25. PubMed ID: 18355935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Meta-analysis of the Italian studies on short-term effects of air pollution].
Biggeri A; Bellini P; Terracini B;
Epidemiol Prev; 2001; 25(2 Suppl):1-71. PubMed ID: 11515188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic test accuracy and prevalence inferences based on joint and sequential testing with finite population sampling.
Su CL; Gardner IA; Johnson WO
Stat Med; 2004 Jul; 23(14):2237-55. PubMed ID: 15236428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A Bayesian approach for estimating values for prevalence and diagnostic test characteristics of porcine cysticercosis.
Dorny P; Phiri IK; Vercruysse J; Gabriel S; Willingham AL; Brandt J; Victor B; Speybroeck N; Berkvens D
Int J Parasitol; 2004 Apr; 34(5):569-76. PubMed ID: 15064121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Estimating disease prevalence in a Bayesian framework using probabilistic constraints.
Berkvens D; Speybroeck N; Praet N; Adel A; Lesaffre E
Epidemiology; 2006 Mar; 17(2):145-53. PubMed ID: 16477254
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Bayes and diagnostic testing.
Lesaffre E; Speybroeck N; Berkvens D
Vet Parasitol; 2007 Aug; 148(1):58-61. PubMed ID: 17566663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Estimation of diagnostic-test sensitivity and specificity through Bayesian modeling.
Branscum AJ; Gardner IA; Johnson WO
Prev Vet Med; 2005 May; 68(2-4):145-63. PubMed ID: 15820113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bayesian estimation of variance partition coefficients adjusted for imperfect test sensitivity and specificity.
Kostoulas P; Leontides L; Browne WJ; Gardner IA
Prev Vet Med; 2009 Jun; 89(3-4):155-62. PubMed ID: 19297045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A general approach to sample size determination for prevalence surveys that use dual test protocols.
Cheng D; Stamey JD; Branscum AJ
Biom J; 2007 Aug; 49(5):694-706. PubMed ID: 17722203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Bayesian modeling of animal- and herd-level prevalences.
Branscum AJ; Gardner IA; Johnson WO
Prev Vet Med; 2004 Dec; 66(1-4):101-12. PubMed ID: 15579338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS.
Lambert PC; Sutton AJ; Burton PR; Abrams KR; Jones DR
Stat Med; 2005 Aug; 24(15):2401-28. PubMed ID: 16015676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A Bayesian approach for the evaluation of six diagnostic assays and the estimation of Cryptosporidium prevalence in dairy calves.
Geurden T; Berkvens D; Geldhof P; Vercruysse J; Claerebout E
Vet Res; 2006; 37(5):671-82. PubMed ID: 16777038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Estimating herd prevalence of bovine brucellosis in 46 USA states using slaughter surveillance.
Ebel ED; Williams MS; Tomlinson SM
Prev Vet Med; 2008 Jul; 85(3-4):295-316. PubMed ID: 18359525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Estimation of test sensitivity and specificity when disease confirmation is limited to positive results.
Walter SD
Epidemiology; 1999 Jan; 10(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 9888282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Estimation of disease prevalence, true positive rate, and false positive rate of two screening tests when disease verification is applied on only screen-positives: a hierarchical model using multi-center data.
Stock EM; Stamey JD; Sankaranarayanan R; Young DM; Muwonge R; Arbyn M
Cancer Epidemiol; 2012 Apr; 36(2):153-60. PubMed ID: 21856264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Bayesian sample size for diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard: Comparing identifiable with non-identifiable models.
Dendukuri N; Bélisle P; Joseph L
Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(26):2688-97. PubMed ID: 20803558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Classical and Bayesian inference in neuroimaging: applications.
Friston KJ; Glaser DE; Henson RN; Kiebel S; Phillips C; Ashburner J
Neuroimage; 2002 Jun; 16(2):484-512. PubMed ID: 12030833
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
