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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35534072)

  • 1. Empirical comparisons of meta-analysis methods for diagnostic studies: a meta-epidemiological study.
    Rosenberger KJ; Chu H; Lin L
    BMJ Open; 2022 May; 12(5):e055336. PubMed ID: 35534072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A mixed effect model for bivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies using a copula representation of the random effects distribution.
    Nikoloulopoulos AK
    Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(29):3842-65. PubMed ID: 26234584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Tutorial: statistical methods for the meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
    Schlattmann P
    Clin Chem Lab Med; 2023 Apr; 61(5):777-794. PubMed ID: 36656998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with SAS PROC GLIMMIX.
    Menke J
    Methods Inf Med; 2010; 49(1):54-62, 62-4. PubMed ID: 19936437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Analysis of single-case experimental count data using the linear mixed effects model: A simulation study.
    Declercq L; Jamshidi L; Fernández-Castilla B; Beretvas SN; Moeyaert M; Ferron JM; Van den Noortgate W
    Behav Res Methods; 2019 Dec; 51(6):2477-2497. PubMed ID: 30105444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Mixture models in diagnostic meta-analyses--clustering summary receiver operating characteristic curves accounted for heterogeneity and correlation.
    Schlattmann P; Verba M; Dewey M; Walther M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jan; 68(1):61-72. PubMed ID: 25441701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of diagnostic studies using generalized linear mixed models.
    Chu H; Guo H; Zhou Y
    Med Decis Making; 2010; 30(4):499-508. PubMed ID: 19959794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Univariate and bivariate likelihood-based meta-analysis methods performed comparably when marginal sensitivity and specificity were the targets of inference.
    Dahabreh IJ; Trikalinos TA; Lau J; Schmid CH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Mar; 83():8-17. PubMed ID: 28063915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Clinical utility of serologic testing for celiac disease in ontario: an evidence-based analysis.
    Medical Advisory Secretariat
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2010; 10(21):1-111. PubMed ID: 23074399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A likelihood-based sensitivity analysis for publication bias on the summary receiver operating characteristic in meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.
    Zhou Y; Huang A; Hattori S
    Stat Med; 2023 Mar; 42(6):781-798. PubMed ID: 36584693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A D-vine copula mixed model for joint meta-analysis and comparison of diagnostic tests.
    Nikoloulopoulos AK
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019; 28(10-11):3286-3300. PubMed ID: 30255733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. PET-CT for assessing mediastinal lymph node involvement in patients with suspected resectable non-small cell lung cancer.
    Schmidt-Hansen M; Baldwin DR; Hasler E; Zamora J; Abraira V; Roqué I Figuls M
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2014 Nov; 2014(11):CD009519. PubMed ID: 25393718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Statistical methods for multivariate meta-analysis of diagnostic tests: An overview and tutorial.
    Ma X; Nie L; Cole SR; Chu H
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Aug; 25(4):1596-619. PubMed ID: 23804970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity: summary of quantitative findings in 50 meta-analyses.
    Menke J
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2014 Dec; 20(6):844-52. PubMed ID: 24828853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An exemplary reanalysis of coronary computed tomography angiography diagnostic meta-analyses shows insufficient data sharing and incorrect sensitivity and specificity estimates.
    Vogelgesang F; Coenen MH; Schueler S; Schlattmann P; Dewey M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Jun; 170():111306. PubMed ID: 38428541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Total serum bile acids or serum bile acid profile, or both, for the diagnosis of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy.
    Manzotti C; Casazza G; Stimac T; Nikolova D; Gluud C
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2019 Jul; 7(7):CD012546. PubMed ID: 31283001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An evaluation of computational methods for aggregate data meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies.
    Zhao Y; Khan B; Negeri ZF
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 May; 24(1):111. PubMed ID: 38730436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Skew-normal random-effects model for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies.
    Negeri ZF; Beyene J
    Biom J; 2020 Sep; 62(5):1223-1244. PubMed ID: 32022315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.