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 *

320 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8135452)

  • 21. Reporting quality of diagnostic accuracy studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of investigations on adherence to STARD.
    Korevaar DA; van Enst WA; Spijker R; Bossuyt PM; Hooft L
    Evid Based Med; 2014 Apr; 19(2):47-54. PubMed ID: 24368333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. An empirical comparison of methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy showed hierarchical models are necessary.
    Harbord RM; Whiting P; Sterne JA; Egger M; Deeks JJ; Shang A; Bachmann LM
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Nov; 61(11):1095-103. PubMed ID: 19208372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Critical reading of systematic reviews and meta-analyses about diagnostic imaging].
    Plana MN; Zamora J; Abraira V
    Radiologia; 2015 Nov; 57 Suppl 2():23-30. PubMed ID: 26071664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Empirical evidence of the importance of comparative studies of diagnostic test accuracy.
    Takwoingi Y; Leeflang MM; Deeks JJ
    Ann Intern Med; 2013 Apr; 158(7):544-54. PubMed ID: 23546566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Consensus-based reporting standards for diagnostic test accuracy studies for paratuberculosis in ruminants.
    Gardner IA; Nielsen SS; Whittington RJ; Collins MT; Bakker D; Harris B; Sreevatsan S; Lombard JE; Sweeney R; Smith DR; Gavalchin J; Eda S
    Prev Vet Med; 2011 Aug; 101(1-2):18-34. PubMed ID: 21601933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Statistics for quantifying heterogeneity in univariate and bivariate meta-analyses of binary data: the case of meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy.
    Zhou Y; Dendukuri N
    Stat Med; 2014 Jul; 33(16):2701-17. PubMed ID: 24903142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests for the detection of hyperketonemia in dairy cows.
    Tatone EH; Gordon JL; Hubbs J; LeBlanc SJ; DeVries TJ; Duffield TF
    Prev Vet Med; 2016 Aug; 130():18-32. PubMed ID: 27435643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The Moses-Littenberg meta-analytical method generates systematic differences in test accuracy compared to hierarchical meta-analytical models.
    Dinnes J; Mallett S; Hopewell S; Roderick PJ; Deeks JJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Dec; 80():77-87. PubMed ID: 27485293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [The use of Meta-analysis in the evaluation on diagnostic tests].
    Liu YX; Wang JZ; Pang CK; Liu JP
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2005 Apr; 26(4):294-6. PubMed ID: 15941542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The impact of including different study designs in meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Parker LA; Saez NG; Porta M; Hernández-Aguado I; Lumbreras B
    Eur J Epidemiol; 2013 Sep; 28(9):713-20. PubMed ID: 23269612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Methods and reporting of systematic reviews of comparative accuracy were deficient: a methodological survey and proposed guidance.
    Takwoingi Y; Partlett C; Riley RD; Hyde C; Deeks JJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 May; 121():1-14. PubMed ID: 31843693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Rutjes AW; Reitsma JB; Di Nisio M; Smidt N; van Rijn JC; Bossuyt PM
    CMAJ; 2006 Feb; 174(4):469-76. PubMed ID: 16477057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. How is evidence on test performance synthesized for economic decision models of diagnostic tests? A systematic appraisal of Health Technology Assessments in the UK since 1997.
    Novielli N; Cooper NJ; Abrams KR; Sutton AJ
    Value Health; 2010 Dec; 13(8):952-7. PubMed ID: 21029247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Methodological bias and variation of systematic reviews on diagnostic test accuracy].
    Li ZX; Yang ZR; Xiang X; Gao P; Shu Z; Huang YS; Cao Y; Sun F; Zhan SY
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Feb; 37(2):286-90. PubMed ID: 26917532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Applications of meta-analysis in pathology practice.
    Vamvakas EC
    Am J Clin Pathol; 2001 Dec; 116 Suppl():S47-64. PubMed ID: 11993702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Bayesian meta-analysis of diagnostic tests allowing for imperfect reference standards.
    Menten J; Boelaert M; Lesaffre E
    Stat Med; 2013 Dec; 32(30):5398-413. PubMed ID: 24003003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.