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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21554365)

  • 1. Prior probability (the pretest best guess) affects predictive values of diagnostic tests.
    Erb HN
    Vet Clin Pathol; 2011 Jun; 40(2):154-8. PubMed ID: 21554365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantifying how tests reduce diagnostic uncertainty.
    Coulthard MG
    Arch Dis Child; 2007 May; 92(5):404-8. PubMed ID: 17158858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Diagnostic testing, pre- and post-test probabilities, and their use in clinical practice.
    Paulo S; Mendes S; Vizinho R; Carneiro AV
    Rev Port Cardiol; 2004 Sep; 23(9):1187-98. PubMed ID: 15587576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Visualizing the impact of prevalence on a diagnostic test.
    Rehling M
    Scand J Clin Lab Invest; 2010 Oct; 70(6):458-61. PubMed ID: 20645678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Uncertainty in Bayes.
    Baron JA
    Med Decis Making; 1994; 14(1):46-51. PubMed ID: 8152356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Understanding diagnostic tests 1: sensitivity, specificity and predictive values.
    Akobeng AK
    Acta Paediatr; 2007 Mar; 96(3):338-41. PubMed ID: 17407452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Improving the diagnosis of bipolar disorder: predictive value of screening tests.
    Phelps JR; Ghaemi SN
    J Affect Disord; 2006 Jun; 92(2-3):141-8. PubMed ID: 16529822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The predictive characteristics of D-dimer testing in outpatients with suspected venous thromboembolism: a Bayesian approach.
    Risch L; Monn A; Lüthy R; Honegger H; Huber AR
    Clin Chim Acta; 2004 Jul; 345(1-2):79-87. PubMed ID: 15193980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evidence-based medicine in otolaryngology, Part 3: everyday probabilities: diagnostic tests with binary results.
    Shin JJ; Stinnett S; Page J; Randolph GW
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2012 Aug; 147(2):185-92. PubMed ID: 22588733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Measurements of diagnostic examination performance using quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient and proton MR spectroscopic imaging in the preoperative evaluation of tumor grade in cerebral gliomas.
    Server A; Kulle B; Gadmar ØB; Josefsen R; Kumar T; Nakstad PH
    Eur J Radiol; 2011 Nov; 80(2):462-70. PubMed ID: 20708868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Stepwise diagnostic workup in general practice as a consequence of the Bayesian reasoning].
    Schneider A; Dinant GJ; Szecsenyi J
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2006; 100(2):121-7. PubMed ID: 16686446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Using evidence to determine diagnostic test efficacy.
    Replogle WH; Johnson WD; Hoover KW
    Worldviews Evid Based Nurs; 2009; 6(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 19413584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Estimating sensitivity and specificity from positive predictive value, negative predictive value and prevalence: application to surveillance systems for hospital-acquired infections.
    Kelly H; Bull A; Russo P; McBryde ES
    J Hosp Infect; 2008 Jun; 69(2):164-8. PubMed ID: 18448199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using Bayes theorem to estimate positive and negative predictive values for continuously and ordinally scaled diagnostic tests.
    Fischer F
    Int J Methods Psychiatr Res; 2021 Jun; 30(2):e1868. PubMed ID: 33650777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Joint confidence region estimation on predictive values.
    Schaible BJ; Yin J
    Pharm Stat; 2021 Nov; 20(6):1147-1167. PubMed ID: 34021708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Diagnostic accuracy].
    Simundić AM
    Acta Med Croatica; 2006; 60 Suppl 1():93-111. PubMed ID: 16526310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Predictive value and efficiency of hematology data.
    Galen RS
    Blood Cells; 1980; 6(2):185-97. PubMed ID: 6769520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An investigation of new toxicity test method performance in validation studies: 3. Sensitivity and specificity are not independent of prevalence or distribution of toxicity.
    Bruner LH; Carr GJ; Harbell JW; Curren RD
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 2002 Jun; 21(6):325-34. PubMed ID: 12195936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnostic capacity of rapid influenza antigen test: reappraisal with experience from the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.
    Yang JH; Huang PY; Shie SS; Huang CG; Tsao KC; Huang CT
    J Microbiol Immunol Infect; 2012 Apr; 45(2):102-7. PubMed ID: 22177367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values: diagnosing purple mange.
    Collier J; Huebscher R
    J Am Acad Nurse Pract; 2010 Apr; 22(4):205-9. PubMed ID: 20409258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.