Appropriate statistical methods are required to assess diagnostic tests for replacement, add-on, and triage
Authors:
- Andrew HayenAHAndrew Hayen
- Petra MacaskillPMPetra Macaskill
- Les IrwigLILes Irwig
- Patrick BossuytPBPatrick Bossuyt
- 1 August 2010
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 63 (8) , 883-891
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathwaysBMJ, 2006
- Easy SAS Calculations for Risk or Prevalence Ratios and DifferencesAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2005
- The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performanceJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2003
- Assessment of the accuracy of diagnostic tests: the cross-sectional studyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2003
- Sydney Breast Imaging Accuracy Study: Comparative Sensitivity and Specificity of Mammography and Sonography in Young Women with SymptomsAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2003
- Comparing diagnostic tests: a simple graphic using likelihood ratiosStatistics in Medicine, 2000
- Comparison of the Accuracy of Two Tests with a Confirmatory Procedure Limited to Positive ResultsEpidemiology, 1997
- Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1995
- Likelihood ratios with confidence: Sample size estimation for diagnostic test studiesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1991
- Note on the Sampling Error of the Difference Between Correlated Proportions or PercentagesPsychometrika, 1947