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 *

232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33845775)

  • 1. Comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with an imperfect reference standard - a comparison of correction methods.
    Umemneku Chikere CM; Wilson KJ; Allen AJ; Vale L
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Apr; 21(1):67. PubMed ID: 33845775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bias due to composite reference standards in diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Schiller I; van Smeden M; Hadgu A; Libman M; Reitsma JB; Dendukuri N
    Stat Med; 2016 Apr; 35(9):1454-70. PubMed ID: 26555849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Different latent class models were used and evaluated for assessing the accuracy of campylobacter diagnostic tests: overcoming imperfect reference standards?
    Asselineau J; Paye A; Bessède E; Perez P; Proust-Lima C
    Epidemiol Infect; 2018 Sep; 146(12):1556-1564. PubMed ID: 29945689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Biomarker validation with an imperfect reference: Issues and bounds.
    Emerson SC; Waikar SS; Fuentes C; Bonventre JV; Betensky RA
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Oct; 27(10):2933-2945. PubMed ID: 28166709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Diagnostic test evaluation methodology: A systematic review of methods employed to evaluate diagnostic tests in the absence of gold standard - An update.
    Umemneku Chikere CM; Wilson K; Graziadio S; Vale L; Allen AJ
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(10):e0223832. PubMed ID: 31603953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Estimating diagnostic accuracy of multiple binary tests with an imperfect reference standard.
    Albert PS
    Stat Med; 2009 Feb; 28(5):780-97. PubMed ID: 19101935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Estimating sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests using latent class models that account for conditional dependence between tests: a simulation study.
    Keddie SH; Baerenbold O; Keogh RH; Bradley J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Mar; 23(1):58. PubMed ID: 36894883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of dependent errors in the assessment of diagnostic or screening test accuracy when the reference standard is imperfect.
    Walter SD; Macaskill P; Lord SJ; Irwig L
    Stat Med; 2012 May; 31(11-12):1129-38. PubMed ID: 22351623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diagnostic test accuracy of nutritional tools used to identify undernutrition in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review.
    Håkonsen SJ; Pedersen PU; Bath-Hextall F; Kirkpatrick P
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2015 May; 13(4):141-87. PubMed ID: 26447079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A general framework for comparative Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic studies.
    Menten J; Lesaffre E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Aug; 15():70. PubMed ID: 26315894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Estimation of diagnostic accuracy of a combination of continuous biomarkers allowing for conditional dependence between the biomarkers and the imperfect reference-test.
    García Barrado L; Coart E; Burzykowski T
    Biometrics; 2017 Jun; 73(2):646-655. PubMed ID: 27598904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Estimation of diagnostic test accuracy without full verification: a review of latent class methods.
    Collins J; Huynh M
    Stat Med; 2014 Oct; 33(24):4141-69. PubMed ID: 24910172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Gold standards are out and Bayes is in: Implementing the cure for imperfect reference tests in diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Johnson WO; Jones G; Gardner IA
    Prev Vet Med; 2019 Jun; 167():113-127. PubMed ID: 31027713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bayesian latent class models with conditionally dependent diagnostic tests: a case study.
    Menten J; Boelaert M; Lesaffre E
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(22):4469-88. PubMed ID: 18551515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dual composite reference standards (dCRS) in molecular diagnostic research: A new approach to reduce bias in the presence of Imperfect reference.
    Tang S; Hemyari P; Canchola JA; Duncan J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(5):951-965. PubMed ID: 29355450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards.
    Valenstein PN
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1990 Feb; 93(2):252-8. PubMed ID: 2405632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown.
    Enøe C; Georgiadis MP; Johnson WO
    Prev Vet Med; 2000 May; 45(1-2):61-81. PubMed ID: 10802334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fuzzy gold standards: Approaches to handling an imperfect reference standard.
    Walsh T
    J Dent; 2018 Jul; 74 Suppl 1():S47-S49. PubMed ID: 29929589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard.
    Toft N; Jørgensen E; Højsgaard S
    Prev Vet Med; 2005 Apr; 68(1):19-33. PubMed ID: 15795013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Latent class models in diagnostic studies when there is no reference standard--a systematic review.
    van Smeden M; Naaktgeboren CA; Reitsma JB; Moons KG; de Groot JA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2014 Feb; 179(4):423-31. PubMed ID: 24272278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.