167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23475941)
1. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with the Bayesian SAS PROC MCMC: methodology and empirical evaluation in 50 meta-analyses.
Menke J
Med Decis Making; 2013 Jul; 33(5):692-701. PubMed ID: 23475941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC GLIMMIX.
Menke J
Methods Inf Med; 2010; 49(1):54-62, 62-4. PubMed ID: 19936437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies using integrated nested Laplace approximations.
Paul M; Riebler A; Bachmann LM; Rue H; Held L
Stat Med; 2010 May; 29(12):1325-39. PubMed ID: 20101670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity: summary of quantitative findings in 50 meta-analyses.
Menke J
J Eval Clin Pract; 2014 Dec; 20(6):844-52. PubMed ID: 24828853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test data: a bivariate Bayesian modeling approach.
Verde PE
Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(30):3088-102. PubMed ID: 21170904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Univariate and bivariate likelihood-based meta-analysis methods performed comparably when marginal sensitivity and specificity were the targets of inference.
Dahabreh IJ; Trikalinos TA; Lau J; Schmid CH
J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Mar; 83():8-17. PubMed ID: 28063915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Evaluation of Bivariate Mixed Models in Meta-analyses of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies with SAS, Stata and R.
Vogelgesang F; Schlattmann P; Dewey M
Methods Inf Med; 2018 May; 57(3):111-119. PubMed ID: 29719917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [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]
9. Bayesian hierarchical models for multi-level repeated ordinal data using WinBUGS.
Qiu Z; Song PX; Tan M
J Biopharm Stat; 2002 May; 12(2):121-35. PubMed ID: 12413235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Logistic random effects regression models: a comparison of statistical packages for binary and ordinal outcomes.
Li B; Lingsma HF; Steyerberg EW; Lesaffre E
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2011 May; 11():77. PubMed ID: 21605357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessing the convergence of Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods: an example from evaluation of diagnostic tests in absence of a gold standard.
Toft N; Innocent GT; Gettinby G; Reid SW
Prev Vet Med; 2007 May; 79(2-4):244-56. PubMed ID: 17292499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Empirical Bayes estimates generated in a hierarchical summary ROC analysis agreed closely with those of a full Bayesian analysis.
Macaskill P
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Sep; 57(9):925-32. PubMed ID: 15504635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bayesian regression in SAS software.
Sullivan SG; Greenland S
Int J Epidemiol; 2013 Feb; 42(1):308-17. PubMed ID: 23230299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Comparison of simple pooling and bivariate model used in meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy published in Chinese journals].
Huang YS; Yang ZR; Zhan SY
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2015 Jun; 47(3):483-8. PubMed ID: 26080880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Two new methods to fit models for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects.
Law M; Jackson D; Turner R; Rhodes K; Viechtbauer W
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Jul; 16():87. PubMed ID: 27465416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Implementing informative priors for heterogeneity in meta-analysis using meta-regression and pseudo data.
Rhodes KM; Turner RM; White IR; Jackson D; Spiegelhalter DJ; Higgins JP
Stat Med; 2016 Dec; 35(29):5495-5511. PubMed ID: 27577523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Hierarchical Bayesian estimates of distributed MEG sources: theoretical aspects and comparison of variational and MCMC methods.
Nummenmaa A; Auranen T; Hämäläinen MS; Jääskeläinen IP; Lampinen J; Sams M; Vehtari A
Neuroimage; 2007 Apr; 35(2):669-85. PubMed ID: 17300961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
