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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27570476)

  • 1. A Mixed-effects Location-Scale Model for Ordinal Questionnaire Data.
    Hedeker D; Mermelstein RJ; Demirtas H; Berbaum ML
    Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol; 2016 Sep; 16(3):117-131. PubMed ID: 27570476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A mixed ordinal location scale model for analysis of Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) data.
    Hedeker D; Demirtas H; Mermelstein RJ
    Stat Interface; 2009; 2(4):391-401. PubMed ID: 20357914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An application of a mixed-effects location scale model for analysis of Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) data.
    Hedeker D; Mermelstein RJ; Demirtas H
    Biometrics; 2008 Jun; 64(2):627-34. PubMed ID: 17970819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Modeling between-subject and within-subject variances in ecological momentary assessment data using mixed-effects location scale models.
    Hedeker D; Mermelstein RJ; Demirtas H
    Stat Med; 2012 Nov; 31(27):3328-36. PubMed ID: 22419604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement.
    Edelen MO; Reeve BB
    Qual Life Res; 2007; 16 Suppl 1():5-18. PubMed ID: 17375372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Using SAS PROC NLMIXED to fit item response theory models.
    Sheu CF; Chen CT; Su YH; Wang WC
    Behav Res Methods; 2005 May; 37(2):202-18. PubMed ID: 16171193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A 3-level Bayesian mixed effects location scale model with an application to ecological momentary assessment data.
    Lin X; Mermelstein RJ; Hedeker D
    Stat Med; 2018 Jun; 37(13):2108-2119. PubMed ID: 29484693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Disparity between General Symptom Relief and Remission Criteria in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS): A Post-treatment Bifactor Item Response Theory Model.
    Anderson AE; Reise SP; Marder SR; Mansolf M; Han C; Bilder RM
    Innov Clin Neurosci; 2017 Dec; 14(11-12):41-53. PubMed ID: 29410936
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A mixed-effects regression model for longitudinal multivariate ordinal data.
    Liu LC; Hedeker D
    Biometrics; 2006 Mar; 62(1):261-8. PubMed ID: 16542254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A General Unfolding IRT Model for Multiple Response Styles.
    Liu CW; Wang WC
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 May; 43(3):195-210. PubMed ID: 31019356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Tests.
    Hontangas PM; de la Torre J; Ponsoda V; Leenen I; Morillo D; Abad FJ
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2015 Nov; 39(8):598-612. PubMed ID: 29881030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sample Size Requirements for Applying Mixed Polytomous Item Response Models: Results of a Monte Carlo Simulation Study.
    Kutscher T; Eid M; Crayen C
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():2494. PubMed ID: 31798490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Item selection via Bayesian IRT models.
    Arima S
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(3):487-503. PubMed ID: 25327293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Examination of a three-dimensional drinking motives questionnaire in a young adult university student sample.
    Stewart SH; Zeitlin SB; Samoluk SB
    Behav Res Ther; 1996 Jan; 34(1):61-71. PubMed ID: 8561766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparing Attitudes Across Groups: An IRT-Based Item-Fit Statistic for the Analysis of Measurement Invariance.
    Buchholz J; Hartig J
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 May; 43(3):241-250. PubMed ID: 31019359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Scale development with small samples: a new application of longitudinal item response theory.
    Houts CR; Morlock R; Blum SI; Edwards MC; Wirth RJ
    Qual Life Res; 2018 Jul; 27(7):1721-1734. PubMed ID: 29423756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Integration of the Forced-Choice Questionnaire and the Likert Scale: A Simulation Study.
    Xiao Y; Liu H; Li H
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():806. PubMed ID: 28572781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. General mixture item response models with different item response structures: Exposition with an application to Likert scales.
    Tijmstra J; Bolsinova M; Jeon M
    Behav Res Methods; 2018 Dec; 50(6):2325-2344. PubMed ID: 29322400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. State of the psychometric methods: patient-reported outcome measure development and refinement using item response theory.
    Stover AM; McLeod LD; Langer MM; Chen WH; Reeve BB
    J Patient Rep Outcomes; 2019 Jul; 3(1):50. PubMed ID: 31359210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using item response theory to calibrate the Headache Impact Test (HIT) to the metric of traditional headache scales.
    Bjorner JB; Kosinski M; Ware JE
    Qual Life Res; 2003 Dec; 12(8):981-1002. PubMed ID: 14651417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.