Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 45

References for PMC Articles for PubMed (Select 19075208)

1.

Interpreting diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Bossuyt PM.

Semin Hematol. 2008 Jul;45(3):189-95. doi: 10.1053/j.seminhematol.2008.04.001.

PMID:
18582626
2.

Bias in sensitivity and specificity caused by data-driven selection of optimal cutoff values: mechanisms, magnitude, and solutions.

Leeflang MM, Moons KG, Reitsma JB, Zwinderman AH.

Clin Chem. 2008 Apr;54(4):729-37. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2007.096032. Epub 2008 Feb 7.

3.

We should not pool diagnostic likelihood ratios in systematic reviews.

Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM.

Stat Med. 2008 Feb 28;27(5):687-97.

PMID:
17611957
4.

Impact of adjustment for quality on results of metaanalyses of diagnostic accuracy.

Leeflang M, Reitsma J, Scholten R, Rutjes A, Di Nisio M, Deeks J, Bossuyt P.

Clin Chem. 2007 Feb;53(2):164-72. Epub 2006 Dec 21.

5.

Urinary bladder tumor markers.

Lokeshwar VB, Selzer MG.

Urol Oncol. 2006 Nov-Dec;24(6):528-37. Review.

PMID:
17138134
6.

The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved?

Smidt N, Rutjes AW, van der Windt DA, Ostelo RW, Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bouter LM, de Vet HC.

Neurology. 2006 Sep 12;67(5):792-7.

PMID:
16966539
7.

Meta-analysis of diagnostic and screening test accuracy evaluations: methodologic primer.

Gatsonis C, Paliwal P.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 Aug;187(2):271-81.

PMID:
16861527
8.

Post hoc choice of cut points introduced bias to diagnostic research.

Ewald B.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Aug;59(8):798-801. Epub 2006 May 26. Erratum in: J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jul;60(7):756.

PMID:
16828672
9.
10.

A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Harbord RM, Deeks JJ, Egger M, Whiting P, Sterne JA.

Biostatistics. 2007 Apr;8(2):239-51. Epub 2006 May 11. Erratum in: Biostatistics. 2008 Oct;9(4):779.

11.

Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways.

Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P.

BMJ. 2006 May 6;332(7549):1089-92. Review. No abstract available. Erratum in: BMJ. 2006 Jun 10;332(7554):1368.

12.

Sample sizes of studies on diagnostic accuracy: literature survey.

Bachmann LM, Puhan MA, ter Riet G, Bossuyt PM.

BMJ. 2006 May 13;332(7550):1127-9. Epub 2006 Apr 20. Review.

13.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: systematic review.

Whiting P, Harbord R, Main C, Deeks JJ, Filippini G, Egger M, Sterne JA.

BMJ. 2006 Apr 15;332(7546):875-84. Epub 2006 Mar 24. Review.

14.

Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies.

Leeflang MM, Scholten RJ, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Mar;59(3):234-40. Review.

15.

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 14;174(4):469-76.

16.

Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews.

Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Oct;58(10):982-90. Review.

PMID:
16168343
17.
18.

A randomized trial of ways to describe test accuracy: the effect on physicians' post-test probability estimates.

Puhan MA, Steurer J, Bachmann LM, ter Riet G.

Ann Intern Med. 2005 Aug 2;143(3):184-9.

PMID:
16061916
19.

How does study quality affect the results of a diagnostic meta-analysis?

Westwood ME, Whiting PF, Kleijnen J.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005 Jun 8;5:20. Review.

20.

No role for quality scores in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Whiting P, Harbord R, Kleijnen J.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005 May 26;5:19. Review.

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk