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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27487844)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy studies: a new statistical model using beta-binomial distributions and bivariate copulas.
    Kuss O; Hoyer A; Solms A
    Stat Med; 2014 Jan; 33(1):17-30. PubMed ID: 23873593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Empirical comparisons of meta-analysis methods for diagnostic studies: a meta-epidemiological study.
    Rosenberger KJ; Chu H; Lin L
    BMJ Open; 2022 May; 12(5):e055336. PubMed ID: 35534072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Estimating receiver operating characteristic curves with covariates when there is no perfect reference test for diagnosis of Johne's disease.
    Wang C; Turnbull BW; Gröhn YT; Nielsen SS
    J Dairy Sci; 2006 Aug; 89(8):3038-46. PubMed ID: 16840620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Statistical methods for the meta-analysis of diagnostic tests must take into account the use of surrogate standards.
    Kang J; Brant R; Ghali WA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 May; 66(5):566-574.e1. PubMed ID: 23466018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence: alternative parameterizations and model selection.
    Chu H; Nie L; Cole SR; Poole C
    Stat Med; 2009 Aug; 28(18):2384-99. PubMed ID: 19499551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Beta-binomial analysis of variance model for network meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy data.
    N Nyaga V; Arbyn M; Aerts M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Aug; 27(8):2554-2566. PubMed ID: 29984635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. A multinomial quadrivariate D-vine copula mixed model for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies in the presence of non-evaluable subjects.
    Nikoloulopoulos AK
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Oct; 29(10):2988-3005. PubMed ID: 32323626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy.
    Irwig L; Macaskill P; Glasziou P; Fahey M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1995 Jan; 48(1):119-30; discussion 131-2. PubMed ID: 7853038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Associating explanatory variables with summary receiver operating characteristic curves in diagnostic meta-analysis.
    Hamza TH; van Houwelingen HC; Heijenbrok-Kal MH; Stijnen T
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Dec; 62(12):1284-91. PubMed ID: 19398297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Modelling multiple thresholds in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
    Steinhauser S; Schumacher M; Rücker G
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Aug; 16(1):97. PubMed ID: 27520527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Statistics for quantifying heterogeneity in univariate and bivariate meta-analyses of binary data: the case of meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy.
    Zhou Y; Dendukuri N
    Stat Med; 2014 Jul; 33(16):2701-17. PubMed ID: 24903142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A mixed model approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic studies with binary test outcome.
    Doebler P; Holling H; Böhning D
    Psychol Methods; 2012 Sep; 17(3):418-36. PubMed ID: 22582866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis models for diagnostic test accuracy studies using arcsine-based transformations.
    Negeri ZF; Shaikh M; Beyene J
    Biom J; 2018 Jul; 60(4):827-844. PubMed ID: 29748967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews.
    Reitsma JB; Glas AS; Rutjes AW; Scholten RJ; Bossuyt PM; Zwinderman AH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Oct; 58(10):982-90. PubMed ID: 16168343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [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]  

  • 38. Meta-analysis of studies with bivariate binary outcomes: a marginal beta-binomial model approach.
    Chen Y; Hong C; Ning Y; Su X
    Stat Med; 2016 Jan; 35(1):21-40. PubMed ID: 26303591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data.
    Zamora J; Abraira V; Muriel A; Khan K; Coomarasamy A
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Jul; 6():31. PubMed ID: 16836745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.