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 *

73 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21232680)

  • 1. How many readers and cases does one need to conduct an ROC study?
    Chakraborty DP
    Acad Radiol; 2011 Feb; 18(2):127-8. PubMed ID: 21232680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reducing the number of reader interpretations in MRMC studies.
    Obuchowski NA
    Acad Radiol; 2009 Feb; 16(2):209-17. PubMed ID: 19124107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reader variability in mammography and its implications for expected utility over the population of readers and cases.
    Wagner RF; Beam CA; Beiden SV
    Med Decis Making; 2004; 24(6):561-72. PubMed ID: 15534338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A permutation test for comparing ROC curves in multireader studies a multi-reader ROC, permutation test.
    Bandos AI; Rockette HE; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Apr; 13(4):414-20. PubMed ID: 16554220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Area of the ROC curve when one point is available.
    Katostaras T; Katostara N
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2013; 190():219-21. PubMed ID: 23823428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Reliability studies of diagnostic tests are not using enough observers for robust estimation of interobserver agreement: a simulation study.
    Sadatsafavi M; Najafzadeh M; Lynd L; Marra C
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Jul; 61(7):722-7. PubMed ID: 18486446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Wilcoxon-based group sequential designs for comparison of areas under two correlated ROC curves.
    Zhou XH; Li SM; Gatsonis CA
    Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(2):213-23. PubMed ID: 17357988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Perceptually based FROC analysis.
    Arora R; Kundel HL; Beam CA
    Acad Radiol; 2005 Dec; 12(12):1567-74. PubMed ID: 16321746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Tests of equivalence and non-inferiority for diagnostic accuracy based on the paired areas under ROC curves.
    Liu JP; Ma MC; Wu CY; Tai JY
    Stat Med; 2006 Apr; 25(7):1219-38. PubMed ID: 16158400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Bayesian bootstrap estimation of ROC curve.
    Gu J; Ghosal S; Roy A
    Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(26):5407-20. PubMed ID: 18613217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. [Roaming through methodology. XXXIV. Limitations of predictive models].
    Visser M
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2001 Jun; 145(23):1109-12. PubMed ID: 11450603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Bayesian hierarchical approach to multirater correlated ROC analysis.
    Johnson TD; Johnson VE
    Stat Med; 2006 Jun; 25(11):1858-71. PubMed ID: 16158405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The use of receiver operating characteristic curves in biomedical informatics.
    Lasko TA; Bhagwat JG; Zou KH; Ohno-Machado L
    J Biomed Inform; 2005 Oct; 38(5):404-15. PubMed ID: 16198999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Toward consistent use of reporting scales in imaging studies.
    Wagner RF
    Acad Radiol; 2008 Feb; 15(2):137-8. PubMed ID: 18206612
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis. Generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method.
    Dorfman DD; Berbaum KS; Metz CE
    Invest Radiol; 1992 Sep; 27(9):723-31. PubMed ID: 1399456
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Combining dependent tests to compare the diagnostic accuracies--a non-parametric approach.
    Yang Y; Jin Z
    Stat Med; 2006 Apr; 25(7):1239-50. PubMed ID: 16158406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Not different is not the same as the same: how can we tell?
    Drummond GB; Vowler SL
    Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 2012 Dec; 39(12):991-4. PubMed ID: 23919813
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Not different is not the same as the same: how can we tell?
    Drummond GB; Vowler SL
    Adv Physiol Educ; 2012 Dec; 36(4):261-4. PubMed ID: 23209006
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.