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 *

106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30346498)

  • 1. Fostering the Understanding of Positive Test Results.
    Pighin S; Tentori K; Savadori L; Girotto V
    Ann Behav Med; 2018 Oct; 52(11):909-919. PubMed ID: 30346498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Children's quantitative Bayesian inferences from natural frequencies and number of chances.
    Pighin S; Girotto V; Tentori K
    Cognition; 2017 Nov; 168():164-175. PubMed ID: 28692831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effects of numeracy and presentation format on judgments of contingency.
    Cooper S; Vallée-Tourangeau F
    Mem Cognit; 2021 Feb; 49(2):389-399. PubMed ID: 32851568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Judging the Probability of Hypotheses Versus the Impact of Evidence: Which Form of Inductive Inference Is More Accurate and Time-Consistent?
    Tentori K; Chater N; Crupi V
    Cogn Sci; 2016 Apr; 40(3):758-78. PubMed ID: 26100936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Towards an understanding of adult judgments of synergistic health benefits.
    Dawson IG; Dohle S
    Br J Health Psychol; 2016 Feb; 21(1):204-23. PubMed ID: 26353849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The accuracy of patients' judgments of disease probability and test sensitivity and specificity.
    Hamm RM; Smith SL
    J Fam Pract; 1998 Jul; 47(1):44-52. PubMed ID: 9673608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The impact of disablers on predictive inference.
    Cummins DD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2014 Nov; 40(6):1638-55. PubMed ID: 24911137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Beliefs and Bayesian reasoning.
    Cohen AL; Sidlowski S; Staub A
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2017 Jun; 24(3):972-978. PubMed ID: 27604495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Asking better questions: How presentation formats influence information search.
    Wu CM; Meder B; Filimon F; Nelson JD
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Aug; 43(8):1274-1297. PubMed ID: 28318286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visual representation of statistical information improves diagnostic inferences in doctors and their patients.
    Garcia-Retamero R; Hoffrage U
    Soc Sci Med; 2013 Apr; 83():27-33. PubMed ID: 23465201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Improving public interpretation of probabilistic test results: distributive evaluations.
    Pighin S; Gonzalez M; Savadori L; Girotto V
    Med Decis Making; 2015 Jan; 35(1):12-5. PubMed ID: 24842952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Visual aids improve diagnostic inferences and metacognitive judgment calibration.
    Garcia-Retamero R; Cokely ET; Hoffrage U
    Front Psychol; 2015; 6():932. PubMed ID: 26236247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Informing patients: the influence of numeracy, framing, and format of side effect information on risk perceptions.
    Peters E; Hart PS; Fraenkel L
    Med Decis Making; 2011; 31(3):432-6. PubMed ID: 21191122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Different developmental patterns of simple deductive and probabilistic inferential reasoning.
    Markovits H; Thompson V
    Mem Cognit; 2008 Sep; 36(6):1066-78. PubMed ID: 18927025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Diagnostic causal reasoning with verbal information.
    Meder B; Mayrhofer R
    Cogn Psychol; 2017 Aug; 96():54-84. PubMed ID: 28623726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Effect of Information Formats and Incidental Affect on Prior and Posterior Probability Judgments.
    Armstrong BA; Sparrow EP; Spaniol J
    Med Decis Making; 2020 Jul; 40(5):680-692. PubMed ID: 32659157
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Time to decide? Simplicity and congruity in comparative judgment.
    Frosch CA; McCloy R; Beaman CP; Goddard K
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2015 Jan; 41(1):42-54. PubMed ID: 25068857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Natural Frequencies Do Not Foster Public Understanding of Medical Test Results.
    Pighin S; Gonzalez M; Savadori L; Girotto V
    Med Decis Making; 2016 Aug; 36(6):686-91. PubMed ID: 27034447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An account of subjective probability judgment for joint events: Conjunctive and disjunctive.
    Fisk JE; Marshall DA; Rogers P; Stock R
    Scand J Psychol; 2019 Oct; 60(5):405-420. PubMed ID: 31242534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Probability in reasoning: a developmental test on conditionals.
    Barrouillet P; Gauffroy C
    Cognition; 2015 Apr; 137():22-39. PubMed ID: 25590946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.