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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9495687)

  • 1. Bias in discrepant analysis: when two wrongs don't make a right.
    Miller WC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1998 Mar; 51(3):219-31. PubMed ID: 9495687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The discrepancy in discrepant analysis.
    Hadgu A
    Lancet; 1996 Aug; 348(9027):592-3. PubMed ID: 8774575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quantifying the bias associated with use of discrepant analysis.
    Lipman HB; Astles JR
    Clin Chem; 1998 Jan; 44(1):108-15. PubMed ID: 9550567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Some issues in resolution of diagnostic tests using an imperfect gold standard.
    Hawkins DM; Garrett JA; Stephenson B
    Stat Med; 2001 Jul; 20(13):1987-2001. PubMed ID: 11427955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards.
    Valenstein PN
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1990 Feb; 93(2):252-8. PubMed ID: 2405632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fuzzy gold standards: Approaches to handling an imperfect reference standard.
    Walsh T
    J Dent; 2018 Jul; 74 Suppl 1():S47-S49. PubMed ID: 29929589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bias in the evaluation of DNA-amplification tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis.
    Hadgu A
    Stat Med; 1997 Jun; 16(12):1391-9. PubMed ID: 9232760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of dependent errors in the assessment of diagnostic or screening test accuracy when the reference standard is imperfect.
    Walter SD; Macaskill P; Lord SJ; Irwig L
    Stat Med; 2012 May; 31(11-12):1129-38. PubMed ID: 22351623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Dual composite reference standards (dCRS) in molecular diagnostic research: A new approach to reduce bias in the presence of Imperfect reference.
    Tang S; Hemyari P; Canchola JA; Duncan J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2018; 28(5):951-965. PubMed ID: 29355450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Problems in detecting misfit of latent class models in diagnostic research without a gold standard were shown.
    van Smeden M; Oberski DL; Reitsma JB; Vermunt JK; Moons KG; de Groot JA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jun; 74():158-66. PubMed ID: 26628335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The use of imperfect diagnostic tests had an impact on prevalence estimation.
    Ihorst G; Forster J; Petersen G; Werchau H; Rohwedder A; Schumacher M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 60(9):902-10. PubMed ID: 17689806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A Bayesian approach to simultaneously adjusting for verification and reference standard bias in diagnostic test studies.
    Lu Y; Dendukuri N; Schiller I; Joseph L
    Stat Med; 2010 Oct; 29(24):2532-43. PubMed ID: 20799249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Measurement error correction for logistic regression models with an "alloyed gold standard".
    Spiegelman D; Schneeweiss S; McDermott A
    Am J Epidemiol; 1997 Jan; 145(2):184-96. PubMed ID: 9006315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Partial verification bias and incorporation bias affected accuracy estimates of diagnostic studies for biomarkers that were part of an existing composite gold standard.
    Karch A; Koch A; Zapf A; Zerr I; Karch A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Oct; 78():73-82. PubMed ID: 27107877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Discrepant analysis: a biased and an unscientific method for estimating test sensitivity and specificity.
    Hadgu A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1999 Dec; 52(12):1231-7. PubMed ID: 10580787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Can we do better than discrepant analysis for new diagnostic test evaluation?
    Miller WC
    Clin Infect Dis; 1998 Nov; 27(5):1186-93. PubMed ID: 9827267
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Correcting for exposure misclassification using an alloyed gold standard.
    Brenner H
    Epidemiology; 1996 Jul; 7(4):406-10. PubMed ID: 8793367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.