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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34504454)

  • 1. Model Selection for Cogitative Diagnostic Analysis of the Reading Comprehension Test.
    Liu H; Bian Y
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():644764. PubMed ID: 34504454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Examining Parameter Invariance in a General Diagnostic Classification Model.
    Ravand H; Baghaei P; Doebler P
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():2930. PubMed ID: 31998189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The accuracy and consistency of mastery for each content domain using the Rasch and deterministic inputs, noisy “and” gate diagnostic classification models: a simulation study and a real-world analysis using data from the Korean Medical Licensing Examination.
    Seo DG; Kim JK
    J Educ Eval Health Prof; 2021; 18():15. PubMed ID: 34225413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimation of item parameters and examinees' mastery probability in each domain of the Korean medical licensing examination using deterministic inputs, noisy and gate(DINA) model.
    Choi Y; Seo DG
    J Educ Eval Health Prof; 2020; 17():35. PubMed ID: 33197992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Research on the Cognitive Diagnosis of Chinese Listening Comprehension Ability Based on the G-DINA Model.
    Li L; An Y; Ren J; Wei X
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():714568. PubMed ID: 34557134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Modeling Test-Taking Non-effort in MIRT Models.
    Liu Y; Li Z; Liu H; Luo F
    Front Psychol; 2019; 10():145. PubMed ID: 30778317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Robustness of Projective IRT to Misspecification of the Underlying Multidimensional Model.
    Strachan T; Ip E; Fu Y; Ackerman T; Chen SH; Willse J
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2020 Jul; 44(5):362-375. PubMed ID: 32879536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sample Size Requirements for Applying Diagnostic Classification Models.
    Sen S; Cohen AS
    Front Psychol; 2020; 11():621251. PubMed ID: 33569029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Latent variable sdelection in multidimensional item response theory models using the expectation model selection algorithm.
    Xu PF; Shang L; Zheng QZ; Shan N; Tang ML
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2022 May; 75(2):363-394. PubMed ID: 34918834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Simple-Structure Multidimensional Item Response Theory Equating for Multidimensional Tests.
    Kim SY; Lee WC; Kolen MJ
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2020 Feb; 80(1):91-125. PubMed ID: 31933494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A classification model for continuous responses: Identifying risk perception groups on health-related activities.
    de Oliveira ESB; Wang X; Bazán JL
    Biom J; 2023 Apr; 65(4):e2100222. PubMed ID: 36782079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Noncompensatory MIRT For Passage-Based Tests.
    Kim N; Bolt DM; Wollack J
    Psychometrika; 2022 Sep; 87(3):992-1009. PubMed ID: 35060012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Efficient Models for Cognitive Diagnosis With Continuous and Mixed-Type Latent Variables.
    Hong H; Wang C; Lim YS; Douglas J
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2015 Jan; 39(1):31-43. PubMed ID: 29880992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A Sequential Process Model for Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment With Repeated Attempts.
    Hung SP; Huang HY
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 Oct; 43(7):495-511. PubMed ID: 31534286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Parameter Recovery in Multidimensional Item Response Theory Models Under Complexity and Nonnormality.
    Svetina D; Valdivia A; Underhill S; Dai S; Wang X
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2017 Oct; 41(7):530-544. PubMed ID: 29881104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Validating a Reading Assessment Within the Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Framework: Q-Matrix Construction and Model Comparisons for Different Primary Grades.
    Li Y; Zhen M; Liu J
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():786612. PubMed ID: 34975681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Multilevel Modeling of Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment: The Multilevel DINA Example.
    Wang WC; Qiu XL
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 Jan; 43(1):34-50. PubMed ID: 30573933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Incorporating the Q-Matrix Into Multidimensional Item Response Theory Models.
    da Silva MA; Liu R; Huggins-Manley AC; Bazán JL
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2019 Aug; 79(4):665-687. PubMed ID: 32655178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A Family of Generalized Diagnostic Classification Models for Multiple Choice Option-Based Scoring.
    DiBello LV; Henson RA; Stout WF
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2015 Jan; 39(1):62-79. PubMed ID: 29880994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Consistency of Cluster Analysis for Cognitive Diagnosis: The DINO Model and the DINA Model Revisited.
    Chiu CY; Köhn HF
    Appl Psychol Meas; 2015 Sep; 39(6):465-479. PubMed ID: 29881019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.