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 *

296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7637146)

  • 1. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good.
    Reid MC; Lachs MS; Feinstein AR
    JAMA; 1995 Aug 23-30; 274(8):645-51. PubMed ID: 7637146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Compliance with methodological standards when evaluating ophthalmic diagnostic tests.
    Harper R; Reeves B
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1999 Jul; 40(8):1650-7. PubMed ID: 10393031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Research on diagnostic tests in Medicina Clinica. A methodological assessment].
    Ramos Rincón JM; Hernández Aguado I
    Med Clin (Barc); 1998 Jul; 111(4):129-34. PubMed ID: 9717144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Methodologic standards for diagnostic test research in pulmonary medicine.
    Heffner JE; Feinstein D; Barbieri C
    Chest; 1998 Sep; 114(3):877-85. PubMed ID: 9743180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Methods for evaluating diagnostic tests in Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica].
    Ramos JM; Hernández I
    Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin; 1998 Apr; 16(4):179-84. PubMed ID: 9646562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Methodology in diagnostic laboratory test research in clinical chemistry and clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.
    Lumbreras-Lacarra B; Ramos-Rincón JM; Hernández-Aguado I
    Clin Chem; 2004 Mar; 50(3):530-6. PubMed ID: 14718393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Diagnostic accuracy of flow rate testing in urology.
    Patel HR; Garcia-Montes F; Christopher N; Reeves BC; Emberton M
    BJU Int; 2003 Jul; 92(1):58-63. PubMed ID: 12823384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recognising bias in studies of diagnostic tests part 2: interpreting and verifying the index test.
    Kea B; Hall MK; Wang R
    Emerg Med J; 2019 Aug; 36(8):501-505. PubMed ID: 31221671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The assessment of diagnostic tests: a comparison of medical literature in 1982 and 1985.
    Arroll B; Schechter MT; Sheps SB
    J Gen Intern Med; 1988; 3(5):443-7. PubMed ID: 3049967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [New guidelines for better documentation of survey methodology and results].
    Lindstedt G; Eliasson M
    Lakartidningen; 2005 Mar 7-13; 102(10):748, 750, 752-3. PubMed ID: 15839166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Critical appraisal for emergency medicine: 5 Evaluation of a diagnostic test.
    Goodacre S
    Emerg Med J; 2009 Jan; 26(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 19104103
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. [Systematic reviews in practice. X. Searching, selecting and the methodological assessment of diagnostic evaluation research].
    Devillé WL; Bossuyt PM; de Vet HC; Bezemer PD; Bouter LM; Assendelft WJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2002 Nov; 146(48):2281-4. PubMed ID: 12497754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Diagnostic accuracy measures.
    Eusebi P
    Cerebrovasc Dis; 2013; 36(4):267-72. PubMed ID: 24135733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative reviews of diagnostic test accuracy in imaging research: evaluation of current practices.
    Dehmoobad Sharifabadi A; Leeflang M; Treanor L; Kraaijpoel N; Salameh JP; Alabousi M; Asraoui N; Choo-Foo J; Takwoingi Y; Deeks JJ; McInnes MDF
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Oct; 29(10):5386-5394. PubMed ID: 30899976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Verification and classification bias interactions in diagnostic test accuracy studies for fine-needle aspiration biopsy.
    Schmidt RL; Walker BS; Cohen MB
    Cancer Cytopathol; 2015 Mar; 123(3):193-201. PubMed ID: 25521425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma.
    Virgili G; Michelessi M; Miele A; Oddone F; Crescioli G; Fameli V; Lucenteforte E
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(10):e0186209. PubMed ID: 29023557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Study design for the evaluation of diagnostic tests.
    Daya S
    Semin Reprod Endocrinol; 1996 May; 14(2):101-9. PubMed ID: 8796932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 5. Diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Manchikanti L; Derby R; Wolfer L; Singh V; Datta S; Hirsch JA
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(3):517-40. PubMed ID: 19461821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests.
    Lijmer JG; Mol BW; Heisterkamp S; Bonsel GJ; Prins MH; van der Meulen JH; Bossuyt PM
    JAMA; 1999 Sep; 282(11):1061-6. PubMed ID: 10493205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.