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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8912303)

  • 1. Inferences for likelihood ratios in the absence of a "gold standard".
    Joseph L; Gyorkos TW
    Med Decis Making; 1996; 16(4):412-7. PubMed ID: 8912303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Generalized likelihood ratios for quantitative diagnostic test scores.
    Tandberg D; Deely JJ; O'Malley AJ
    Am J Emerg Med; 1997 Nov; 15(7):694-9. PubMed ID: 9375556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian decision making based on measurements containing errors.
    Philosophov LV
    Med Decis Making; 1995; 15(3):264-75. PubMed ID: 7564940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown.
    Enøe C; Georgiadis MP; Johnson WO
    Prev Vet Med; 2000 May; 45(1-2):61-81. PubMed ID: 10802334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards.
    Hui SL; Zhou XH
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1998 Dec; 7(4):354-70. PubMed ID: 9871952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of Bayesian and maximum likelihood methods to determine the performance of a point of care test for Helicobacter pylori in the office setting.
    Delaney BC; Holder RL; Allan TF; Kenkre JE; Hobbs FD
    Med Decis Making; 2003; 23(1):21-30. PubMed ID: 12583452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Propagation of uncertainty in Bayesian diagnostic test interpretation.
    Srinivasan P; Westover MB; Bianchi MT
    South Med J; 2012 Sep; 105(9):452-9. PubMed ID: 22948322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparing Rasch analyses probability estimates to sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios when examining the utility of medical diagnostic tests.
    Cipriani D; Fox C; Khuder S; Boudreau N
    J Appl Meas; 2005; 6(2):180-201. PubMed ID: 15795486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Statistical methods in epidemiology. VIII. On the use of likelihood ratios for diagnostic testing with an application to general practice.
    Rigby AS; Summerton N
    Disabil Rehabil; 2005 May; 27(9):475-80. PubMed ID: 16040551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Making sense of diagnostic tests likelihood ratios.
    Perera R; Heneghan C
    Evid Based Med; 2006 Oct; 11(5):130-1. PubMed ID: 17213136
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bayesian methods for the analysis of small sample multilevel data with a complex variance structure.
    Baldwin SA; Fellingham GW
    Psychol Methods; 2013 Jun; 18(2):151-64. PubMed ID: 23148476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Development of a multiplex assay for the detection of antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi in horses and its validation using Bayesian and conventional statistical methods.
    Wagner B; Freer H; Rollins A; Erb HN; Lu Z; Gröhn Y
    Vet Immunol Immunopathol; 2011 Dec; 144(3-4):374-81. PubMed ID: 21890217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Bayes theorem: Fully informed rational estimates of diagnostic probabilities.
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2010 Jun; 141(6):658-9. PubMed ID: 20516096
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Data cloning: easy maximum likelihood estimation for complex ecological models using Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.
    Lele SR; Dennis B; Lutscher F
    Ecol Lett; 2007 Jul; 10(7):551-63. PubMed ID: 17542934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Introduction to quantitative semiology].
    Chatellier G; Ménard J; Degoulet P
    Rev Prat; 1996 Feb; 46(3):291-7. PubMed ID: 8815505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bayesian estimation of intervention effect with pre- and post-misclassified binomial data.
    Stamey JD; Seaman JW; Young DM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(1):93-108. PubMed ID: 17219757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 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. Bayesian sample size for diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard: Comparing identifiable with non-identifiable models.
    Dendukuri N; Bélisle P; Joseph L
    Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(26):2688-97. PubMed ID: 20803558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods.
    Mossman D; Berger JO
    Med Decis Making; 2001; 21(6):498-507. PubMed ID: 11760107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.