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 *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29719917)

  • 1. The Evaluation of Bivariate Mixed Models in Meta-analyses of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies with SAS, Stata and R.
    Vogelgesang F; Schlattmann P; Dewey M
    Methods Inf Med; 2018 May; 57(3):111-119. PubMed ID: 29719917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC GLIMMIX.
    Menke J
    Methods Inf Med; 2010; 49(1):54-62, 62-4. PubMed ID: 19936437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies using integrated nested Laplace approximations.
    Paul M; Riebler A; Bachmann LM; Rue H; Held L
    Stat Med; 2010 May; 29(12):1325-39. PubMed ID: 20101670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with the Bayesian SAS PROC MCMC: methodology and empirical evaluation in 50 meta-analyses.
    Menke J
    Med Decis Making; 2013 Jul; 33(5):692-701. PubMed ID: 23475941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A double SIMEX approach for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Guolo A
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jan; 17(1):6. PubMed ID: 28077079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Logistic random effects regression models: a comparison of statistical packages for binary and ordinal outcomes.
    Li B; Lingsma HF; Steyerberg EW; Lesaffre E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2011 May; 11():77. PubMed ID: 21605357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Meta-DiSc 2.0: a web application for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy data.
    Plana MN; Arevalo-Rodriguez I; Fernández-García S; Soto J; Fabregate M; Pérez T; Roqué M; Zamora J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Nov; 22(1):306. PubMed ID: 36443653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Diagnostic test accuracy: application and practice using R software.
    Shim SR; Kim SJ; Lee J
    Epidemiol Health; 2019; 41():e2019007. PubMed ID: 30999739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. Development of an interactive web-based tool to conduct and interrogate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: MetaDTA.
    Freeman SC; Kerby CR; Patel A; Cooper NJ; Quinn T; Sutton AJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Apr; 19(1):81. PubMed ID: 30999861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Statistical methods for multivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: An overview and tutorial.
    Ma X; Nie L; Cole SR; Chu H
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Aug; 25(4):1596-619. PubMed ID: 23804970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A mixed effect model for bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies using a copula representation of the random effects distribution.
    Nikoloulopoulos AK
    Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(29):3842-65. PubMed ID: 26234584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A vine copula mixed effect model for trivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies accounting for disease prevalence.
    Nikoloulopoulos AK
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Oct; 26(5):2270-2286. PubMed ID: 26265766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Maximum likelihood estimation based on Newton-Raphson iteration for the bivariate random effects model in test accuracy meta-analysis.
    Willis BH; Baragilly M; Coomar D
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Apr; 29(4):1197-1211. PubMed ID: 31184270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new method for synthesizing test accuracy data outperformed the bivariate method.
    Furuya-Kanamori L; Kostoulas P; Doi SAR
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Apr; 132():51-58. PubMed ID: 33333166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Skew-normal random-effects model for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies.
    Negeri ZF; Beyene J
    Biom J; 2020 Sep; 62(5):1223-1244. PubMed ID: 32022315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests accounting for disease prevalence: a new model using trivariate copulas.
    Hoyer A; Kuss O
    Stat Med; 2015 May; 34(11):1912-24. PubMed ID: 25712874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.