120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3755325)
21. Diagnostic testing, pre- and post-test probabilities, and their use in clinical practice.
Paulo S; Mendes S; Vizinho R; Carneiro AV
Rev Port Cardiol; 2004 Sep; 23(9):1187-98. PubMed ID: 15587576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Relationship of prior myocardial infarction to false-positive electrocardiographic diagnosis of acute injury in patients with chest pain.
Miller DH; Kligfield P; Schreiber TL; Borer JS
Arch Intern Med; 1987 Feb; 147(2):257-61. PubMed ID: 3813742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. [Measurements of serum activity of creatine kinase and creatine kinase isoenzyme MB in suspected myocardial infarction. Experiences from a hospital material].
Daae LN; Hasle TE; von der Lippe A
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1996 May; 116(13):1573-5. PubMed ID: 8685868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Correlation between serial tests made disease probability estimates erroneous.
van Walraven C; Austin PC; Jennings A; Forster AJ
J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Dec; 62(12):1301-5. PubMed ID: 19716680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Diagnosing tests: using and misusing diagnostic and screening tests.
Streiner DL
J Pers Assess; 2003 Dec; 81(3):209-19. PubMed ID: 14638445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Emergency serum creatine kinase MB isoenzyme concentration in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction.
Gunn IR; Mir NS; Parnham AJ; Caslake CE; Matthews DM; O'Brien IA
Health Bull (Edinb); 1993 May; 51(3):166-76. PubMed ID: 8325777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Diagnostic likelihood ratios].
Capron L
Rev Prat; 2000 Nov; 50(17):1865-9. PubMed ID: 11151325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Clinical performance of the new cardiac markers troponin T and CK-MB on the Elecsys 2010. A multicentre evaluation.
Klein G; Kampmann M; Baum H; Rauscher T; Vukovic T; Hallermayer K; Rehner H; Müller-Bardorff M; Katus HA
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1998; 110 Suppl 3():40-51. PubMed ID: 9677671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The accuracy of patients' judgments of disease probability and test sensitivity and specificity.
Hamm RM; Smith SL
J Fam Pract; 1998 Jul; 47(1):44-52. PubMed ID: 9673608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [ROC (receiver operating characteristics) curve: principles and application in biology].
Delacour H; Servonnet A; Perrot A; Vigezzi JF; Ramirez JM
Ann Biol Clin (Paris); 2005; 63(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 15771972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Probabilistic reporting of EUS-FNA cytology: Toward improved communication and better clinical decisions.
Eltoum IA; Chen VK; Chhieng DC; Jhala D; Jhala NC; Crowe R; Varadarajulu S; Eloubeidi MA
Cancer; 2006 Apr; 108(2):93-101. PubMed ID: 16444743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Suspected myocardial infarction.
Burdick CO
Am J Clin Pathol; 2000 Apr; 113(4):592-3. PubMed ID: 10761462
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Comparison of the likelihood ratios of two binary diagnostic tests in paired designs.
Nofuentes JA; Del Castillo Jde D
Stat Med; 2007 Sep; 26(22):4179-201. PubMed ID: 17357992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A score predicts failure of reperfusion after fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction.
French JK; Ramanathan K; Stewart JT; Gao W; Théroux P; White HD
Am Heart J; 2003 Mar; 145(3):508-14. PubMed ID: 12660675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Evaluating diagnostic performance of clinical tests by spreadsheet modeling. Bayesian analysis using Ri/Cj ratio as a unifying concept.
Krieg AF; Beck JR; Bongiovanni MB
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1988 Jun; 112(6):588-93. PubMed ID: 3288168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [Considerations on the information content of diagnostic tests (author's transl)].
Borkenstein J; Goebel R
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1976 Jul; 88(14):460-3. PubMed ID: 960705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Ruling out or ruling in disease with the most sensitive or specific diagnostic test: short cut or wrong turn?
Boyko EJ
Med Decis Making; 1994; 14(2):175-9. PubMed ID: 8028470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Using evidence to determine diagnostic test efficacy.
Replogle WH; Johnson WD; Hoover KW
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs; 2009; 6(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 19413584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. How to use and interpret interval likelihood ratios.
Sonis J
Fam Med; 1999 Jun; 31(6):432-7. PubMed ID: 10367208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Slopes of a receiver operating characteristic curve and likelihood ratios for a diagnostic test.
Choi BC
Am J Epidemiol; 1998 Dec; 148(11):1127-32. PubMed ID: 9850136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
