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 *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32659157)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Experienced Probabilities Increase Understanding of Diagnostic Test Results in Younger and Older Adults.
    Armstrong B; Spaniol J
    Med Decis Making; 2017 Aug; 37(6):670-679. PubMed ID: 28199179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. How should risk be communicated to children: a cross-sectional study comparing different formats of probability information.
    Ulph F; Townsend E; Glazebrook C
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2009 Jun; 9():26. PubMed ID: 19500337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improving Diagnostic Efficiency with Frequency Double-Trees and Frequency Nets in Bayesian Reasoning.
    Kunzelmann AK; Binder K; Fischer MR; Reincke M; Braun LT; Schmidmaier R
    MDM Policy Pract; 2022; 7(1):23814683221086623. PubMed ID: 35321028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Sequentially simulated outcomes: kind experience versus nontransparent description.
    Hogarth RM; Soyer E
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2011 Aug; 140(3):434-63. PubMed ID: 21639669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Bayesian sampler: Generic Bayesian inference causes incoherence in human probability judgments.
    Zhu JQ; Sanborn AN; Chater N
    Psychol Rev; 2020 Oct; 127(5):719-748. PubMed ID: 32191073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Background beliefs in Bayesian inference.
    Evans JS; Handley SJ; Over DE; Perham N
    Mem Cognit; 2002 Mar; 30(2):179-90. PubMed ID: 12035880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clarifying the relationship between coherence and accuracy in probability judgments.
    Zhu JQ; Newall PWS; Sundh J; Chater N; Sanborn AN
    Cognition; 2022 Jun; 223():105022. PubMed ID: 35074619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. [How can one improve the understanding and communication of the importance of medical test results?].
    Hoffrage U; Kurzenhäuser S; Gigerenzer G
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2000 Oct; 94(9):713-9. PubMed ID: 11127778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Natural frequency trees improve diagnostic efficiency in Bayesian reasoning.
    Binder K; Krauss S; Schmidmaier R; Braun LT
    Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2021 Aug; 26(3):847-863. PubMed ID: 33599875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Rating exposure control using Bayesian decision analysis.
    Hewett P; Logan P; Mulhausen J; Ramachandran G; Banerjee S
    J Occup Environ Hyg; 2006 Oct; 3(10):568-81. PubMed ID: 16998991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The experience-based format of probability improves probability estimates: The moderating role of individual differences in numeracy.
    Traczyk J; Sobkow A; Matukiewicz A; Petrova D; Garcia-Retamero R
    Int J Psychol; 2020 Apr; 55(2):273-281. PubMed ID: 30690731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. When intuitive Bayesians need to be good readers: The problem-wording effect on Bayesian reasoning.
    Sirota M; Navarrete G; Juanchich M
    Cognition; 2024 Apr; 245():105722. PubMed ID: 38309041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Aiding Risk Information learning through Simulated Experience (ARISE): A Comparison of the Communication of Screening Test Information in Explicit and Simulated Experience Formats.
    Wegier P; Armstrong BA; Shaffer VA
    Med Decis Making; 2019 Apr; 39(3):196-207. PubMed ID: 30819033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Frequency versus probability formats in statistical word problems.
    Evans JS; Handley SJ; Perham N; Over DE; Thompson VA
    Cognition; 2000 Dec; 77(3):197-213. PubMed ID: 11018509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Are Jurors Intuitive Statisticians? Bayesian Causal Reasoning in Legal Contexts.
    Shengelia T; Lagnado D
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():519262. PubMed ID: 33613348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.