Mathematical tools for demonstrating the clinical usefulness of biochemical markers

Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation, Supplement

Volumn 57, Issue 227, 1997, Pages 46-63

  Boyd, James C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Evaluation studies; Likelihood ratio; Logistic regression analysis; Predictive value; Reference standard; ROC curve; Sensitivity; Specificity; Spectrum; Statistics

Indexed keywords

BIOCHEMICAL MARKER; CHLORIDE; PARATHYROID HORMONE; PHOSPHATE; BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

BONE DISEASE; CONFERENCE PAPER; FETUS LUNG MATURITY; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HUMAN; HYPERPARATHYROIDISM; MATHEMATICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; STATISTICS; EVALUATION; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REFERENCE VALUE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; EVALUATION STUDIES; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0031000752     PISSN: 0085591X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/00365519709168308     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (5)

1. Magid E. Some concepts and principles of clinical test evaluation. Introduction. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1992; Suppl 208:9-12.
2. Zweig MH, Robertson EA. Why we need better test evaluations. Clin Chem 1982;28:1272-1276.
3. Robertson EA, Zweig MH, Van Steirteghem AC. Evaluationg the clinical efficacy of laboratory tests. Am J Clin Pathol 1983;79:78-86.
4. Møller-Petersen J. Evaluation of diagnostic tests. Design and phases. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1992;Suppl 208: 35-50.
5. Jaeschke R, Guyatt G, Sackett DL. Users' guides to the medical literature, III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test, A. Are the results of the study valid? J Am Med Assoc 1994;271:389-391.