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 *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30762378)

  • 1. A change-point analysis procedure based on weighted residuals to detect back random responding.
    Yu X; Cheng Y
    Psychol Methods; 2019 Oct; 24(5):658-674. PubMed ID: 30762378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A new perspective on detecting performance decline: A change-point analysis based on Jensen-Shannon divergence.
    Tu D; Li Y; Cai Y
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Apr; 55(3):963-980. PubMed ID: 35524039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Detection of Test Speededness Using Change-Point Analysis.
    Shao C; Li J; Cheng Y
    Psychometrika; 2016 Dec; 81(4):1118-1141. PubMed ID: 26305400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Application of Change Point Analysis of Response Time Data to Detect Test Speededness.
    Cheng Y; Shao C
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2022 Oct; 82(5):1031-1062. PubMed ID: 35989725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Comprehensive Review and Comparison of CUSUM and Change-Point-Analysis Methods to Detect Test Speededness.
    Yu X; Cheng Y
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2022; 57(1):112-133. PubMed ID: 32877253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Statistical power as a function of Cronbach alpha of instrument questionnaire items.
    Heo M; Kim N; Faith MS
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Oct; 15():86. PubMed ID: 26467219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A Response-Time-Based Latent Response Mixture Model for Identifying and Modeling Careless and Insufficient Effort Responding in Survey Data.
    Ulitzsch E; Pohl S; Khorramdel L; Kroehne U; von Davier M
    Psychometrika; 2022 Jun; 87(2):593-619. PubMed ID: 34855118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Detecting Careless Responding in Survey Data Using Stochastic Gradient Boosting.
    Schroeders U; Schmidt C; Gnambs T
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2022 Feb; 82(1):29-56. PubMed ID: 34992306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Item response theory scoring and the detection of curvilinear relationships.
    Carter NT; Dalal DK; Guan L; LoPilato AC; Withrow SA
    Psychol Methods; 2017 Mar; 22(1):191-203. PubMed ID: 27819433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reversed item bias: an integrative model.
    Weijters B; Baumgartner H; Schillewaert N
    Psychol Methods; 2013 Sep; 18(3):320-34. PubMed ID: 23646990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Robust maximum marginal likelihood (RMML) estimation for item response theory models.
    Hong MR; Cheng Y
    Behav Res Methods; 2019 Apr; 51(2):573-588. PubMed ID: 30350024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dealing with Careless Responding in Survey Data: Prevention, Identification, and Recommended Best Practices.
    Ward MK; Meade AW
    Annu Rev Psychol; 2023 Jan; 74():577-596. PubMed ID: 35973734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Two-Stage Approach to Differentiating Normal and Aberrant Behavior in Computer Based Testing.
    Wang C; Xu G; Shang Z
    Psychometrika; 2018 Mar; 83(1):223-254. PubMed ID: 27796763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Managing heteroscedasticity in general linear models.
    Rosopa PJ; Schaffer MM; Schroeder AN
    Psychol Methods; 2013 Sep; 18(3):335-51. PubMed ID: 24015776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Detection of back random responding: effectiveness of MMPI-2 and Personality Assessment Inventory validity indices.
    Clark ME; Gironda RJ; Young RW
    Psychol Assess; 2003 Jun; 15(2):223-34. PubMed ID: 12847783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Assessment and Impact of Careless Responding in Routine Outcome Monitoring within Mental Health Care.
    Conijn JM; Franz G; Emons WHM; de Beurs E; Carlier IVE
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2019; 54(4):593-611. PubMed ID: 31001995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Generalized Speed-Accuracy Response Model for Dichotomous Items.
    van Rijn PW; Ali US
    Psychometrika; 2018 Mar; 83(1):109-131. PubMed ID: 29164449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Phase III development of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire module for women undergoing breast reconstruction.
    Winters ZE; Balta V; Thomson HJ; Brandberg Y; Oberguggenberger A; Sinove Y; Unukovych D; Nava M; Sandelin K; Johansson H; ; Dobbeleir J; Blondeel P; Bruno N; Catanuto G; Llewellyn-Bennett R
    Br J Surg; 2014 Mar; 101(4):371-82. PubMed ID: 24474151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sequential detection of learning in cognitive diagnosis.
    Ye S; Fellouris G; Culpepper S; Douglas J
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2016 May; 69(2):139-58. PubMed ID: 26931602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Development of an Inconsistent Responding Scale for the Triarchic Psychopathy Measure.
    Mowle EN; Kelley SE; Edens JF; Donnellan MB; Smith ST; Wygant DB; Sellbom M
    Psychol Assess; 2017 Aug; 29(8):990-1000. PubMed ID: 27748618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.