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.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Journal Abstract Search
110 related items for PubMed ID: 29663479
1. Quantifying rater variation for ordinal data using a rating scale model. Zhang S, Petersen JH. Stat Med; 2018 Jun 30; 37(14):2223-2237. PubMed ID: 29663479 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing the influence of rater and subject characteristics on measures of agreement for ordinal ratings. Nelson KP, Mitani AA, Edwards D. Stat Med; 2017 Sep 10; 36(20):3181-3199. PubMed ID: 28612356 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluating the effects of rater and subject factors on measures of association. Nelson KP, Mitani AA, Edwards D. Biom J; 2018 May 10; 60(3):639-656. PubMed ID: 29349801 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Correcting for rater bias in scores on a continuous scale, with application to breast density. Sperrin M, Bardwell L, Sergeant JC, Astley S, Buchan I. Stat Med; 2013 Nov 20; 32(26):4666-78. PubMed ID: 23674384 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Measuring rater bias in diagnostic tests with ordinal ratings. Kim C, Lin X, Nelson KP. Stat Med; 2021 Jul 30; 40(17):4014-4033. PubMed ID: 33969509 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Inter-rater reliability of pressure ulcer staging: ordinal probit Bayesian hierarchical model that allows for uncertain rater response. Gajewski BJ, Hart S, Bergquist-Beringer S, Dunton N. Stat Med; 2007 Nov 10; 26(25):4602-18. PubMed ID: 17393413 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Reliability of Untrained and Experienced Raters on FEES: Rating Overall Residue is a Simple Task. Pisegna JM, Borders JC, Kaneoka A, Coster WJ, Leonard R, Langmore SE. Dysphagia; 2018 Oct 10; 33(5):645-654. PubMed ID: 29516172 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Inter-rater agreement on assessment of outcome within a trauma registry. Ekegren CL, Hart MJ, Brown A, Gabbe BJ. Injury; 2016 Jan 10; 47(1):130-4. PubMed ID: 26304002 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessing agreement between multiple raters with missing rating information, applied to breast cancer tumour grading. Fanshawe TR, Lynch AG, Ellis IO, Green AR, Hanka R. PLoS One; 2008 Aug 13; 3(8):e2925. PubMed ID: 18698346 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Investigation of psychophysical similarity measures for selection of similar images in the diagnosis of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms. Muramatsu C, Li Q, Schmidt R, Shiraishi J, Doi K. Med Phys; 2008 Dec 13; 35(12):5695-702. PubMed ID: 19175126 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer. Winkel RR, von Euler-Chelpin M, Nielsen M, Diao P, Nielsen MB, Uldall WY, Vejborg I. BMC Cancer; 2015 Apr 12; 15():274. PubMed ID: 25884160 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Inter- and intra-rater agreement in the assessment of the vascularity of spinal metastases using digital subtraction angiography tumor blush. Clausen C, Dahl B, Christiansen Frevert S, Forman JL, Nielsen MB, Lönn L. Acta Radiol; 2017 Jun 12; 58(6):734-739. PubMed ID: 27650032 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]