Misleading authors’ inferences in obstetric diagnostic test literature
- 31 July 1999
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Vol. 181 (1) , 112-115
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70445-x
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- How to read a paper: Papers that report diagnostic or screening testsBMJ, 1997
- The diagnostic accuracy of cervico‐vaginal fetal fibronectin in predicting preterm delivery: an overvievBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1997
- Users' Guides to the Medical LiteratureJAMA, 1994
- Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures.BMJ, 1992
- Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritisControlled Clinical Trials, 1989
- Fraud, distortion, delusion, and consensus: The problems of human and natural deception in epidemiologic scienceThe American Journal of Medicine, 1988
- Science, Statistics, and DeceptionAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1986
- A Classification for Biomedical Research ReportsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- The Road from Research to New Diagnosis and TherapyScience, 1978
- Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.Psychological Bulletin, 1968