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 *

90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23823428)

  • 41. Smooth semiparametric receiver operating characteristic curves for continuous diagnostic tests.
    Wan S; Zhang B
    Stat Med; 2007 May; 26(12):2565-86. PubMed ID: 17072821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. An AUC-like index for agreement assessment.
    Zhang Z; Wang Y; Duan F
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(4):893-907. PubMed ID: 24697741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Variable selection in ROC regression.
    Wang B
    Comput Math Methods Med; 2013; 2013():436493. PubMed ID: 24312135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Equivalence of improvement in area under ROC curve and linear discriminant analysis coefficient under assumption of normality.
    Demler OV; Pencina MJ; D'Agostino RB
    Stat Med; 2011 May; 30(12):1410-8. PubMed ID: 21337594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Extending induced ROC methodology to the functional context.
    Inácio V; González-Manteiga W; Febrero-Bande M; Gude F; Alonzo TA; Cadarso-Suárez C
    Biostatistics; 2012 Sep; 13(4):594-608. PubMed ID: 22474123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models.
    Demler OV; Pencina MJ; D'Agostino RB
    Stat Med; 2012 Oct; 31(23):2577-87. PubMed ID: 22415937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Efficient confidence bounds for ROC curves.
    Schäfer H
    Stat Med; 1994 Aug; 13(15):1551-61. PubMed ID: 7973233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Not different is not the same as the same: how can we tell?
    Drummond GB; Vowler SL
    Br J Pharmacol; 2013 Jan; 168(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 23252665
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Not different is not the same as the same: how can we tell?
    Drummond GB; Vowler SL
    J Physiol; 2012 Nov; 590(21):5257-60. PubMed ID: 23118061
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Discounting model selection with area-based measures: A case for numerical integration.
    Gilroy SP; Hantula DA
    J Exp Anal Behav; 2018 Mar; 109(2):433-449. PubMed ID: 29498424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Assessing alignment between functional markers and ordinal outcomes based on broad sense agreement.
    Jang JH; Peng L; Manatunga AK
    Biometrics; 2019 Dec; 75(4):1367-1379. PubMed ID: 30998261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. [Fitting of ROC curves for continuous data by using correction of the mean and standard deviation].
    Ogawa W; Nakaya G; Karasawa H
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2004 Jan; 60(1):111-7. PubMed ID: 15041913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. C-statistic: A brief explanation of its construction, interpretation and limitations.
    Caetano SJ; Sonpavde G; Pond GR
    Eur J Cancer; 2018 Feb; 90():130-132. PubMed ID: 29221899
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. A short note on the maximal point-biserial correlation under non-normality.
    Cheng Y; Liu H
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2016 Nov; 69(3):344-351. PubMed ID: 27458986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Witness of unsatisfiability for a random 3-satisfiability formula.
    Wu LL; Zhou HJ; Alava M; Aurell E; Orponen P
    Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys; 2013 May; 87(5):052807. PubMed ID: 23767584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Bias and prevalence effects on kappa viewed in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
    Hoehler FK
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2000 May; 53(5):499-503. PubMed ID: 10812322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. [Assumption of maximal indetermination: an absolute error or a relative error in calculation of sample size?].
    Marrugat J; Vila J; Pavesi M
    Gac Sanit; 1999; 13(6):491. PubMed ID: 10733336
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. On the equivalence of classic ROC analysis and the loss-function model to set cut points in sequential testing.
    Regehr G; Colliver J
    Acad Med; 2003 Apr; 78(4):361-4. PubMed ID: 12691964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Determining sample size for ROC studies: what is reasonable for the expected difference in tests' ROC areas?
    Obuchowski NA
    Acad Radiol; 2003 Nov; 10(11):1327-8. PubMed ID: 14626309
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Why we permute blocks?
    Bangdiwala SI
    Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot; 2015; 22(3):278-80. PubMed ID: 26230294
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.