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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27103183)

  • 1. Interrater Agreement on the Visual Analysis of Individual Tiers and Functional Relations in Multiple Baseline Designs.
    Wolfe K; Seaman MA; Drasgow E
    Behav Modif; 2016 Nov; 40(6):852-873. PubMed ID: 27103183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An exploration of the interrater agreement of visual analysis with and without context.
    Ford ALB; Rudolph BN; Pennington B; Byiers BJ
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2020 Jan; 53(1):572-583. PubMed ID: 30924129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The influence of data characteristics on interrater agreement among visual analysts.
    Wolfe K; Seaman MA
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2023 Apr; 56(2):365-376. PubMed ID: 36855817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Interrater agreement of visual analysis in single-subject decisions: quantitative review and analysis.
    Ottenbacher KJ
    Am J Ment Retard; 1993 Jul; 98(1):135-42. PubMed ID: 8373565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Consistent visual analyses of intrasubject data.
    Kahng S; Chung KM; Gutshall K; Pitts SC; Kao J; Girolami K
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2010 Mar; 43(1):35-45. PubMed ID: 20808494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. How Many Tiers Do We Need? Type I Errors and Power in Multiple Baseline Designs.
    Lanovaz MJ; Turgeon S
    Perspect Behav Sci; 2020 Sep; 43(3):605-616. PubMed ID: 33024931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Interrater agreement between visual analysts of single-case data: a meta-analysis.
    Ninci J; Vannest KJ; Willson V; Zhang N
    Behav Modif; 2015 Jul; 39(4):510-41. PubMed ID: 25878161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Agreement between visual inspection and objective analysis methods: A replication and extension.
    Taylor T; Lanovaz MJ
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2022 Jun; 55(3):986-996. PubMed ID: 35478098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interrater reliability of therapists' judgements of graphed data.
    Harbst KB; Ottenbacher KJ; Harris SR
    Phys Ther; 1991 Feb; 71(2):107-15. PubMed ID: 1989006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Simultaneous estimation of intrarater and interrater agreement for multiple raters under order restrictions for a binary trait.
    Lester Kirchner H; Lemke JH
    Stat Med; 2002 Jun; 21(12):1761-72. PubMed ID: 12111910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An evaluation of the agreement between the conservative dual-criterion method and expert visual analysis.
    Wolfe K; Seaman MA; Drasgow E; Sherlock P
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2018 Apr; 51(2):345-351. PubMed ID: 29574711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. EasyDIAg: A tool for easy determination of interrater agreement.
    Holle H; Rein R
    Behav Res Methods; 2015 Sep; 47(3):837-47. PubMed ID: 25106813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Measures of interrater agreement.
    Mandrekar JN
    J Thorac Oncol; 2011 Jan; 6(1):6-7. PubMed ID: 21178713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Observer reliability of arteriovenous malformations grading scales using current imaging modalities.
    Griessenauer CJ; Miller JH; Agee BS; Fisher WS; Curé JK; Chapman PR; Foreman PM; Fisher WA; Witcher AC; Walters BC
    J Neurosurg; 2014 May; 120(5):1179-87. PubMed ID: 24628617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The role of raters threshold in estimating interrater agreement.
    Nucci M; Spoto A; Altoè G; Pastore M
    Psychol Methods; 2021 Oct; 26(5):622-634. PubMed ID: 34855432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Toward the development of structured criteria for interpretation of functional analysis data.
    Hagopian LP; Fisher WW; Thompson RH; Owen-DeSchryver J; Iwata BA; Wacker DP
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1997; 30(2):313-25; quiz 326. PubMed ID: 9210309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interrater agreement and interrater reliability: key concepts, approaches, and applications.
    Gisev N; Bell JS; Chen TF
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2013; 9(3):330-8. PubMed ID: 22695215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparing Visual and Statistical Analysis of Multiple Baseline Design Graphs.
    Wolfe K; Dickenson TS; Miller B; McGrath KV
    Behav Modif; 2019 May; 43(3):361-388. PubMed ID: 29631412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Interrater agreement statistics with skewed data: evaluation of alternatives to Cohen's kappa.
    Xu S; Lorber MF
    J Consult Clin Psychol; 2014 Dec; 82(6):1219-27. PubMed ID: 25090041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reproducible immunohistochemical criteria based on multiple raters' judgments for expression of thymidine phosphorylase in breast cancer tissue.
    Tsuda H; Akiyama F; Kurosumi M; Sakamoto G
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Aug; 86(3):215-23. PubMed ID: 15567938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.