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: 9799748)

  • 1. Points of care in using statistics in method comparison studies.
    Westgard JO
    Clin Chem; 1998 Nov; 44(11):2240-2. PubMed ID: 9799748
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Modelling method comparison data.
    Dunn G; Roberts C
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1999 Jun; 8(2):161-79. PubMed ID: 10501651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.
    Bland JM; Altman DG
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1999 Jun; 8(2):135-60. PubMed ID: 10501650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Quantitative evaluation of reproducibility of clinical laboratory data day by day].
    Balakhovskiĭ IS
    Klin Lab Diagn; 2003 Mar; (3):50-4. PubMed ID: 12715399
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Validity of linear regression in method comparison studies: is it limited by the statistical model or the quality of the analytical input data?
    Stöckl D; Dewitte K; Thienpont LM
    Clin Chem; 1998 Nov; 44(11):2340-6. PubMed ID: 9799762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Interpretation of statistics in clinical laboratory studies.
    Kay LW; Gebert MA
    Clin Lab Sci; 2006; 19(1):18-23. PubMed ID: 16617554
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Interpreting method comparison studies by use of the bland-altman plot: reflecting the importance of sample size by incorporating confidence limits and predefined error limits in the graphic.
    Stöckl D; Rodríguez Cabaleiro D; Van Uytfanghe K; Thienpont LM
    Clin Chem; 2004 Nov; 50(11):2216-8. PubMed ID: 15502104
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Statistical methods in laboratory medicine.
    Dunn G
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1999 Jun; 8(2):91. PubMed ID: 10501647
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. [Details and statistics of recent tests carried out in the central clinical laboratories of the hospital attached to Niigata University].
    HIROKAWA H; KAWAJI K; KOBAYASHI S; MAJIMA M; TAKIZAWA Y; TERADA I; IEGATA M; YOSHIKAWA T
    Niigata Igakkai Zasshi; 1961 Oct; 75():1243-5. PubMed ID: 13907654
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A tolerance interval approach for assessment of agreement with left censored data.
    Choudhary PK
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):583-94. PubMed ID: 17613643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluating test performance criteria: concepts and practices. Part 4: The assignment of performance limits and the probability of total error compliance.
    Shires GW
    Am Clin Lab; 2000; 19(1):16-7. PubMed ID: 10848434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.
    Jaeschke R; Guyatt GH; Sackett DL
    JAMA; 1994 Mar; 271(9):703-7. PubMed ID: 8309035
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Application of the Bland-Altman plot for interpretation of method-comparison studies: a critical investigation of its practice.
    Dewitte K; Fierens C; Stöckl D; Thienpont LM
    Clin Chem; 2002 May; 48(5):799-801; author reply 801-2. PubMed ID: 11978620
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The rank correlation coefficient: an additional aid in the interpretation of laboratory data.
    Estelberger W; Reibnegger G
    Clin Chim Acta; 1995 Aug; 239(2):203-7. PubMed ID: 8542659
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Establishing reference intervals for clinical laboratory test results: is there a better way?
    Katayev A; Balciza C; Seccombe DW
    Am J Clin Pathol; 2010 Feb; 133(2):180-6. PubMed ID: 20093226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Multidisciplinary Housestaff-Led Initiative to Safely Reduce Daily Laboratory Testing.
    Iams W; Heck J; Kapp M; Leverenz D; Vella M; Szentirmai E; Valerio-Navarrete I; Theobald C; Goggins K; Flemmons K; Sponsler K; Penrod C; Kleinholz P; Brady D; Kripalani S
    Acad Med; 2016 Jun; 91(6):813-20. PubMed ID: 27028031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [The discriminant interval as a means for assessing the results of laboratory studies].
    Vlasov VV
    Klin Lab Diagn; 1993; (5):64-7. PubMed ID: 7994551
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Regression models for method comparison data.
    Dunn G
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):739-56. PubMed ID: 17613651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using the laboratory effectively without running up the bill unnecessarily.
    Bean B; De Cresce R
    Postgrad Med; 1989 Jan; 85(1):75-8, 81-2. PubMed ID: 2911556
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.