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 *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24319439)

  • 1. Conjoint measurement of disorder prevalence, test sensitivity, and test specificity: notes on Botella, Huang, and Suero's multinomial model.
    Erdfelder E; Moshagen M
    Front Psychol; 2013; 4():876. PubMed ID: 24319439
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary tests with an imperfect reference standard.
    Albert PS
    Stat Med; 2009 Feb; 28(5):780-97. PubMed ID: 19101935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of dependent errors in the assessment of diagnostic or screening test accuracy when the reference standard is imperfect.
    Walter SD; Macaskill P; Lord SJ; Irwig L
    Stat Med; 2012 May; 31(11-12):1129-38. PubMed ID: 22351623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with an imperfect reference standard - a comparison of correction methods.
    Umemneku Chikere CM; Wilson KJ; Allen AJ; Vale L
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Apr; 21(1):67. PubMed ID: 33845775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Multinomial tree models for assessing the status of the reference in studies of the accuracy of tools for binary classification.
    Botella J; Huang H; Suero M
    Front Psychol; 2013; 4():694. PubMed ID: 24106484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Illusory conjunctions in the time domain and the resulting time-course of the attentional blink.
    Botella J; Arend I; Suero M
    Span J Psychol; 2004 May; 7(1):63-8. PubMed ID: 15139249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bias in estimating accuracy of a binary screening test with differential disease verification.
    Alonzo TA; Brinton JT; Ringham BM; Glueck DH
    Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(15):1852-64. PubMed ID: 21495059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Parallel processing of stimulus features during RSVP: evidence from the second response.
    Botella J; Narváez M; Suero M; Juola JF
    Percept Psychophys; 2007 Nov; 69(8):1315-23. PubMed ID: 18078223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bias due to composite reference standards in diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Schiller I; van Smeden M; Hadgu A; Libman M; Reitsma JB; Dendukuri N
    Stat Med; 2016 Apr; 35(9):1454-70. PubMed ID: 26555849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Illusory conjunctions reflect the time course of the attentional blink.
    Botella J; Privado J; de Liaño BG; Suero M
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2011 Jul; 73(5):1361-73. PubMed ID: 21387080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Random Effects Models in a Meta-Analysis of the Accuracy of Two Diagnostic Tests Without a Gold Standard.
    Chu H; Chen S; Louis TA
    J Am Stat Assoc; 2009 Jun; 104(486):512-523. PubMed ID: 19562044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies without a gold standard.
    Liu Y; Chen Y; Chu H
    Biometrics; 2015 Jun; 71(2):538-47. PubMed ID: 25358907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Gold standards are out and Bayes is in: Implementing the cure for imperfect reference tests in diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Johnson WO; Jones G; Gardner IA
    Prev Vet Med; 2019 Jun; 167():113-127. PubMed ID: 31027713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Estimating prevalence and diagnostic test characteristics of bovine cysticercosis in Belgium in the absence of a 'gold standard' reference test using a Bayesian approach.
    Jansen F; Dorny P; Gabriël S; Eichenberger RM; Berkvens D
    Vet Parasitol; 2018 Apr; 254():142-146. PubMed ID: 29656999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards.
    Valenstein PN
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1990 Feb; 93(2):252-8. PubMed ID: 2405632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Chapter 9: options for summarizing medical test performance in the absence of a "gold standard".
    Trikalinos TA; Balion CM
    J Gen Intern Med; 2012 Jun; 27 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S67-75. PubMed ID: 22648677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Estimating diagnostic accuracy of raters without a gold standard by exploiting a group of experts.
    Zhang B; Chen Z; Albert PS
    Biometrics; 2012 Dec; 68(4):1294-302. PubMed ID: 23006010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown.
    Enøe C; Georgiadis MP; Johnson WO
    Prev Vet Med; 2000 May; 45(1-2):61-81. PubMed ID: 10802334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using a combination of reference tests to assess the accuracy of a new diagnostic test.
    Alonzo TA; Pepe MS
    Stat Med; 1999 Nov; 18(22):2987-3003. PubMed ID: 10544302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.