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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30859601)

  • 1. The power-integrated discriminant improvement: An accurate measure of the incremental predictive value of additional biomarkers.
    Hayashi K; Eguchi S
    Stat Med; 2019 Jun; 38(14):2589-2604. PubMed ID: 30859601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A note on the evaluation of novel biomarkers: do not rely on integrated discrimination improvement and net reclassification index.
    Hilden J; Gerds TA
    Stat Med; 2014 Aug; 33(19):3405-14. PubMed ID: 23553436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Multicategory reclassification statistics for assessing improvements in diagnostic accuracy.
    Li J; Jiang B; Fine JP
    Biostatistics; 2013 Apr; 14(2):382-94. PubMed ID: 23197381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Simpson's paradox in the integrated discrimination improvement.
    Chipman J; Braun D
    Stat Med; 2017 Dec; 36(28):4468-4481. PubMed ID: 29160558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating the effect of multiple genetic risk score models on colorectal cancer risk prediction.
    Xin J; Chu H; Ben S; Ge Y; Shao W; Zhao Y; Wei Y; Ma G; Li S; Gu D; Zhang Z; Du M; Wang M
    Gene; 2018 Oct; 673():174-180. PubMed ID: 29908285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Inference for reclassification statistics under nested and non-nested models for biomarker evaluation.
    Shao F; Li J; Fine J; Wong WK; Pencina M
    Biomarkers; 2015; 20(4):240-52. PubMed ID: 26301882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluating the incremental value of new biomarkers with integrated discrimination improvement.
    Kerr KF; McClelland RL; Brown ER; Lumley T
    Am J Epidemiol; 2011 Aug; 174(3):364-74. PubMed ID: 21673124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of polygenic risk models using multiple performance measures: a critical assessment of discordant results.
    Martens FK; Tonk ECM; Janssens ACJW
    Genet Med; 2019 Feb; 21(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29895851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interpreting incremental value of markers added to risk prediction models.
    Pencina MJ; D'Agostino RB; Pencina KM; Janssens AC; Greenland P
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Sep; 176(6):473-81. PubMed ID: 22875755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Net Reclassification Index and Integrated Discrimination Index Are Not Appropriate for Testing Whether a Biomarker Improves Predictive Performance.
    Burch PM; Glaab WE; Holder DJ; Phillips JA; Sauer JM; Walker EG
    Toxicol Sci; 2017 Mar; 156(1):11-13. PubMed ID: 27815493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bayesian reclassification statistics for assessing improvements in diagnostic accuracy.
    Huang Z; Li J; Cheng CY; Cheung C; Wong TY
    Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(15):2574-92. PubMed ID: 26875442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Graphical assessment of incremental value of novel markers in prediction models: From statistical to decision analytical perspectives.
    Steyerberg EW; Vedder MM; Leening MJ; Postmus D; D'Agostino RB; Van Calster B; Pencina MJ
    Biom J; 2015 Jul; 57(4):556-70. PubMed ID: 25042996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Asymptotic distribution of ∆AUC, NRIs, and IDI based on theory of U-statistics.
    Demler OV; Pencina MJ; Cook NR; D'Agostino RB
    Stat Med; 2017 Sep; 36(21):3334-3360. PubMed ID: 28627112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessing the predictive power of newly added biomarkers.
    Wang Z; Luo X; Chang YC
    Biom J; 2015 Sep; 57(5):797-807. PubMed ID: 26138083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluating a New Risk Marker's Predictive Contribution in Survival Models.
    Liu M; Kapadia AS; Etzel CJ
    J Stat Theory Pract; 2010 Dec; 4(4):845-855. PubMed ID: 22984361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Usefulness of combining clinical and biochemical parameters for prediction of postoperative pulmonary complications after lung resection surgery.
    Garutti I; De la Gala F; Piñeiro P; Rancan L; Vara E; Reyes A; Puente-Maestu L; Bellón JM; Simón C
    J Clin Monit Comput; 2019 Dec; 33(6):1043-1054. PubMed ID: 30656507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Clinically relevant measures of fit? A note of caution.
    Cook NR
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Sep; 176(6):488-91. PubMed ID: 22875759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond.
    Pencina MJ; D'Agostino RB; D'Agostino RB; Vasan RS
    Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(2):157-72; discussion 207-12. PubMed ID: 17569110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Individualized prediction of mortality using multiple inflammatory markers in patients on dialysis.
    Jung HY; Kim SH; Jang HM; Lee S; Kim YS; Kang SW; Yang CW; Kim NH; Choi JY; Cho JH; Kim CD; Park SH; Kim YL
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(3):e0193511. PubMed ID: 29494637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. First things first: risk model performance metrics should reflect the clinical application.
    Kerr KF; Janes H
    Stat Med; 2017 Dec; 36(28):4503-4508. PubMed ID: 29156498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.