Literature DB >> 16085189

Systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies require study by study examination: first for heterogeneity, and then for sources of heterogeneity.

Colin B Begg1.   

Abstract

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16085189     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.03.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


× No keyword cloud information.
  5 in total

Review 1.  Current evidence on diagnostic accuracy of commercially based nucleic acid amplification tests for the diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis.

Authors:  S Greco; E Girardi; A Navarra; C Saltini
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 9.139

Review 2.  Diagnosing suspected scaphoid fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhong-Gang Yin; Jian-Bing Zhang; Shi-Lian Kan; Xiao-Gang Wang
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Overconfident results with the bivariate random effects model for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Luis Furuya-Kanamori; Eletherios Meletis; Chang Xu; Polychronis Kostoulas; Suhail Ar Doi
Journal:  J Evid Based Med       Date:  2022-03

Review 4.  Airway physical examination tests for detection of difficult airway management in apparently normal adult patients.

Authors:  Dominik Roth; Nathan L Pace; Anna Lee; Karen Hovhannisyan; Alexandra-Maria Warenits; Jasmin Arrich; Harald Herkner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-15

5.  Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac MRI, FDG-PET, and myocardial biopsy for the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dominik Roth; Nikolaos Kadoglou; Mariska Leeflang; Rene Spijker; Harald Herkner; Marialena Trivella
Journal:  Diagn Progn Res       Date:  2020-05-07
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.