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 *

220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25106396)

  • 1. Using Deterministic, Gated Item Response Theory Model to detect test cheating due to item compromise.
    Shu Z; Henson R; Luecht R
    Psychometrika; 2013 Jul; 78(3):481-97. PubMed ID: 25106396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The linear transformation model with frailties for the analysis of item response times.
    Wang C; Chang HH; Douglas JA
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 Feb; 66(1):144-68. PubMed ID: 22506914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A Social Desirability Item Response Theory Model: Retrieve-Deceive-Transfer.
    Leng CH; Huang HY; Yao G
    Psychometrika; 2020 Mar; 85(1):56-74. PubMed ID: 31677045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A mixture model for responses and response times with a higher-order ability structure to detect rapid guessing behaviour.
    Lu J; Wang C; Zhang J; Tao J
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2020 May; 73(2):261-288. PubMed ID: 31385609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A speeded item response model: leave the harder till later.
    Chang YW; Tsai RC; Hsu NJ
    Psychometrika; 2014 Apr; 79(2):255-74. PubMed ID: 24659371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Item pre-knowledge true prevalence in clinical anatomy - application of gated item response theory model.
    Severo M; Silva-Pereira F; Ferreira MA; Monteiro M; Pereira I
    BMC Med Educ; 2019 Jul; 19(1):284. PubMed ID: 31345201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The Impact of Repeated Exposure to Items.
    O'Neill TR; Sun L; Peabody MR; Royal KD
    Teach Learn Med; 2015; 27(4):404-9. PubMed ID: 26507998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Are Exam Questions Known in Advance? Using Local Dependence to Detect Cheating.
    Zimmermann S; Klusmann D; Hampe W
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(12):e0167545. PubMed ID: 27907190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Identifying the unauthorized use of examination material.
    Wood TJ; St-Onge C; Boulais AP; Blackmore DE; Maguire TO
    Eval Health Prof; 2010 Mar; 33(1):96-108. PubMed ID: 20042416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cognitive diagnosis modelling incorporating item response times.
    Zhan P; Jiao H; Liao D
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2018 May; 71(2):262-286. PubMed ID: 28872185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A Two-Stage Approach to Differentiating Normal and Aberrant Behavior in Computer Based Testing.
    Wang C; Xu G; Shang Z
    Psychometrika; 2018 Mar; 83(1):223-254. PubMed ID: 27796763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A hierarchical latent response model for inferences about examinee engagement in terms of guessing and item-level non-response.
    Ulitzsch E; von Davier M; Pohl S
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2020 Nov; 73 Suppl 1():83-112. PubMed ID: 31709521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improving psychometric assessment of the Beck Depression Inventory using multidimensional item response theory.
    Fragoso TM; Cúri M
    Biom J; 2013 Jul; 55(4):527-40. PubMed ID: 23526351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Investigating the relationship between item exposure and test overlap: item sharing and item pooling.
    Chen SY; Lei PW
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 Feb; 63(Pt 1):205-26. PubMed ID: 19545484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Doubly Latent Space Joint Model for Local Item and Person Dependence in the Analysis of Item Response Data.
    Jin IH; Jeon M
    Psychometrika; 2019 Mar; 84(1):236-260. PubMed ID: 29987708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cheating on Unproctored Internet Test Applications: An Analysis of a Verification Test in a Real Personnel Selection Context.
    Aguado D; Vidal A; Olea J; Ponsoda V; Barrada JR; Abad FJ
    Span J Psychol; 2018 Dec; 21():E62. PubMed ID: 30501646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Monte Carlo tests of the Rasch model based on scalability coefficients.
    Christensen KB; Kreiner S
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 Feb; 63(Pt 1):101-11. PubMed ID: 19341515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Stochastic search item selection for factor analytic models.
    Mavridis D; Ntzoufras I
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2014 May; 67(2):284-303. PubMed ID: 23837882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Applying the Rasch sampler to identify aberrant responding through person fit statistics under fixed nominal α-level.
    Spoden C; Fleischer J; Leutner D
    J Appl Meas; 2014; 15(3):276-91. PubMed ID: 24992251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A mixture hierarchical model for response times and response accuracy.
    Wang C; Xu G
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2015 Nov; 68(3):456-77. PubMed ID: 25873487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.