258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21158294)
1. Use of likelihood ratios for comparisons of binary diagnostic tests: underlying ROC curves.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):5821-30. PubMed ID: 21158294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Estimating and comparing diagnostic tests' accuracy when the gold standard is not binary.
Obuchowski NA
Acad Radiol; 2005 Sep; 12(9):1198-204. PubMed ID: 16099683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Estimating the Area Under ROC Curve When the Fitted Binormal Curves Demonstrate Improper Shape.
Bandos AI; Guo B; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2017 Feb; 24(2):209-219. PubMed ID: 27884464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparing the likelihood ratios of two binary diagnostic tests in the presence of partial verification.
Roldán Nofuentes JA; Luna del Castillo JD
Biom J; 2005 Aug; 47(4):442-57. PubMed ID: 16161803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A new parametric method based on S-distributions for computing receiver operating characteristic curves for continuous diagnostic tests.
Sorribas A; March J; Trujillano J
Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(9):1213-35. PubMed ID: 12111875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Binary and multi-category ratings in a laboratory observer performance study: a comparison.
Gur D; Bandos AI; King JL; Klym AH; Cohen CS; Hakim CM; Hardesty LA; Ganott MA; Perrin RL; Poller WR; Shah R; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Rockette HE
Med Phys; 2008 Oct; 35(10):4404-9. PubMed ID: 18975686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Is an ROC-type response truly always better than a binary response in observer performance studies?
Gur D; Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Zuley ML; Hakim CM; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Sumkin JH
Acad Radiol; 2010 May; 17(5):639-45. PubMed ID: 20236840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of diagnostic tests using relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the differential positive rate. An example using the total serum bile acid concentration and the alanine aminotransferase activity in the diagnosis of canine hepatobiliary diseases.
Jensen AL; Poulsen JS
Zentralbl Veterinarmed A; 1992 Nov; 39(9):656-68. PubMed ID: 1455934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A bivariate contaminated binormal model for robust fitting of proper ROC curves to a pair of correlated, possibly degenerate, ROC datasets.
Zhai X; Chakraborty DP
Med Phys; 2017 Jun; 44(6):2207-2222. PubMed ID: 28382718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Incorporating utility-weights when comparing two diagnostic systems: a preliminary assessment.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2005 Oct; 12(10):1293-300. PubMed ID: 16179206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A permutation test sensitive to differences in areas for comparing ROC curves from a paired design.
Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
Stat Med; 2005 Sep; 24(18):2873-93. PubMed ID: 16134144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of correlated receiver operating characteristic curves derived from repeated diagnostic test data.
Zou KH
Acad Radiol; 2001 Mar; 8(3):225-33. PubMed ID: 11249086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Evaluation of the diagnostic value of a test. Main information indices].
Landais P; Besson C; Jais JP
J Radiol; 1995; 76(2-3):I-X. PubMed ID: 7714857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The use of the 'binormal' model for parametric ROC analysis of quantitative diagnostic tests.
Hanley JA
Stat Med; 1996 Jul; 15(14):1575-85. PubMed ID: 8855483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Disadvantages of using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to assess imaging tests: a discussion and proposal for an alternative approach.
Halligan S; Altman DG; Mallett S
Eur Radiol; 2015 Apr; 25(4):932-9. PubMed ID: 25599932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A non-inferiority test for diagnostic accuracy based on the paired partial areas under ROC curves.
Li CR; Liao CT; Liu JP
Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(10):1762-76. PubMed ID: 17968858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves on the basis of optimal operating points.
Halpern EJ; Albert M; Krieger AM; Metz CE; Maidment AD
Acad Radiol; 1996 Mar; 3(3):245-53. PubMed ID: 8796672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sample size determination for diagnostic accuracy studies involving binormal ROC curve indices.
Obuchowski NA; McClish DK
Stat Med; 1997 Jul; 16(13):1529-42. PubMed ID: 9249923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Advantages to transforming the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve into likelihood ratio co-ordinates.
Johnson NP
Stat Med; 2004 Jul; 23(14):2257-66. PubMed ID: 15236429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Statistical comparison of ROC curves from multiple readers.
Swaving M; van Houwelingen H; Ottes FP; Steerneman T
Med Decis Making; 1996; 16(2):143-52. PubMed ID: 8778532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
