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 *

49 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21856264)

  • 21. Evaluation of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Lugol's iodine (VILI), cervical cytology and HPV testing as cervical screening tools in Latin America. This report refers to partial results from the LAMS (Latin AMerican Screening) study.
    Sarian LO; Derchain SF; Naud P; Roteli-Martins C; Longatto-Filho A; Tatti S; Branca M; Erzen M; Serpa-Hammes L; Matos J; Gontijo R; Bragança JF; Lima TP; Maeda MY; Lörincz A; Dores GB; Costa S; Syrjänen S; Syrjänen K
    J Med Screen; 2005; 12(3):142-9. PubMed ID: 16156945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Study on the value assessment of various screening programs regarding cervical cancer screening strategy in the rural areas of China].
    Li LY; Qiao ZQ; Zhang MF; Yang JP; Bao YP; An YT; Lei J; Xiong NH; Yu XH; Zhang X; Pan QJ; Qiao YL
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2007 Oct; 28(10):964-7. PubMed ID: 18399140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Avoiding verification bias in screening test evaluation in resource poor settings: a case study from Zimbabwe.
    Gaffikin L; McGrath J; Arbyn M; Blumenthal PD
    Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):496-503. PubMed ID: 18827042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [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]  

  • 25. Accuracy of visual screening for cervical neoplasia: Results from an IARC multicentre study in India and Africa.
    Sankaranarayanan R; Basu P; Wesley RS; Mahe C; Keita N; Mbalawa CC; Sharma R; Dolo A; Shastri SS; Nacoulma M; Nayama M; Somanathan T; Lucas E; Muwonge R; Frappart L; Parkin DM;
    Int J Cancer; 2004 Jul; 110(6):907-13. PubMed ID: 15170675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Cervical cancer screening. Organised screening to avoid unnecessary conisation.
    Prescrire Int; 2010 Aug; 19(108):172-7, 179. PubMed ID: 20939454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards.
    Hui SL; Zhou XH
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1998 Dec; 7(4):354-70. PubMed ID: 9871952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. On the prediction of statistical parameters in high-throughput screening using resampling techniques.
    Ilouga PE; Hesterkamp T
    J Biomol Screen; 2012 Jul; 17(6):705-12. PubMed ID: 22460175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Bayesian statistic: an approach fitted to clinic].
    Meyer N; Vinzio S; Goichot B
    Rev Med Interne; 2009 Mar; 30(3):242-9. PubMed ID: 18757117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. An epidemiologic critique of current microbial risk assessment practices: the importance of prevalence and test accuracy data.
    Gardner IA
    J Food Prot; 2004 Sep; 67(9):2000-7. PubMed ID: 15453595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Reflections on accuracy.
    Gambino B
    J Gambl Stud; 2006 Dec; 22(4):393-404. PubMed ID: 17096201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Pros and cons of cancer screenings].
    Malila N
    Duodecim; 2014; 130(15):1493-9. PubMed ID: 25211818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparing sensitivity and specificity of medical imaging tests when verification bias is present: The concept of relative diagnostic accuracy.
    Filleron T
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Jan; 98():32-35. PubMed ID: 29279167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Analyzing bioassay data using Bayesian methods--a primer.
    Miller G; Inkret WC; Schillaci ME; Martz HF; Little TT
    Health Phys; 2000 Jun; 78(6):598-613. PubMed ID: 10832919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.