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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29691895)

  • 1. Evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests without conditional independence assumption.
    Lu D; Zhou C; Tang L; Tan M; Yuan A; Chan L
    Stat Med; 2018 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 29691895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard.
    Toft N; Jørgensen E; Højsgaard S
    Prev Vet Med; 2005 Apr; 68(1):19-33. PubMed ID: 15795013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An Iterative, Frequentist Approach for Latent Class Analysis to Evaluate Conditionally Dependent Diagnostic Tests.
    Schoneberg C; Kreienbrock L; Campe A
    Front Vet Sci; 2021; 8():588176. PubMed ID: 33681320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimating sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests using latent class models that account for conditional dependence between tests: a simulation study.
    Keddie SH; Baerenbold O; Keogh RH; Bradley J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Mar; 23(1):58. PubMed ID: 36894883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating Diagnostic Tests With Near-Perfect Specificity: Use of a Hui-Walter Approach When Designing a Trial of a DIVA Test for Bovine Tuberculosis.
    Rydevik G; Innocent GT; McKendrick IJ
    Front Vet Sci; 2018; 5():192. PubMed ID: 30159319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Random effects models for assessing diagnostic accuracy of traditional Chinese doctors in absence of a gold standard.
    Wang Z; Zhou XH
    Stat Med; 2012 Mar; 31(7):661-71. PubMed ID: 21626532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A cautionary note on the robustness of latent class models for estimating diagnostic error without a gold standard.
    Albert PS; Dodd LE
    Biometrics; 2004 Jun; 60(2):427-35. PubMed ID: 15180668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Extending Hui-Walter framework to correlated outcomes with application to diagnosis tests of an eye disease among premature infants.
    Liu YL; Ying GS; Quinn GE; Zhou XH; Chen Y
    Stat Med; 2022 Feb; 41(3):433-448. PubMed ID: 34859902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Latent variable modeling of diagnostic accuracy.
    Yang I; Becker MP
    Biometrics; 1997 Sep; 53(3):948-58. PubMed ID: 9290225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Response moderation models for conditional dependence between response time and response accuracy.
    Bolsinova M; Tijmstra J; Molenaar D
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2017 May; 70(2):257-279. PubMed ID: 27618470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Estimation of diagnostic accuracy of a combination of continuous biomarkers allowing for conditional dependence between the biomarkers and the imperfect reference-test.
    García Barrado L; Coart E; Burzykowski T
    Biometrics; 2017 Jun; 73(2):646-655. PubMed ID: 27598904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sample size re-estimation in paired comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with a binary response.
    McCray GPJ; Titman AC; Ghaneh P; Lancaster GA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jul; 17(1):102. PubMed ID: 28705147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. On the interpretation of test sensitivity in the two-test two-population problem: assumptions matter.
    Johnson WO; Gardner IA; Metoyer CN; Branscum AJ
    Prev Vet Med; 2009 Oct; 91(2-4):116-21. PubMed ID: 19651450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using pseudogold standards and latent-class analysis in combination to evaluate the accuracy of three diagnostic tests.
    Nérette P; Stryhn H; Dohoo I; Hammell L
    Prev Vet Med; 2008 Jul; 85(3-4):207-25. PubMed ID: 18355935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Random effects models in latent class analysis for evaluating accuracy of diagnostic tests.
    Qu Y; Tan M; Kutner MH
    Biometrics; 1996 Sep; 52(3):797-810. PubMed ID: 8805757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bayesian latent class models with conditionally dependent diagnostic tests: a case study.
    Menten J; Boelaert M; Lesaffre E
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(22):4469-88. PubMed ID: 18551515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bayesian sample size for diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard: Comparing identifiable with non-identifiable models.
    Dendukuri N; Bélisle P; Joseph L
    Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(26):2688-97. PubMed ID: 20803558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Empirical likelihood estimation for linear regression models with AR(p) error terms with numerical examples.
    Özdemir Ş; Güney Y; Tuaç Y; Arslan O
    J Appl Stat; 2022; 49(9):2271-2286. PubMed ID: 35812070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reducing Bias for Maximum Approximate Conditional Likelihood Estimator with General Missing Data Mechanism.
    Zhao J
    J Nonparametr Stat; 2017; 29(3):577-593. PubMed ID: 31551650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.