Download

Full Text

See more details

X (1)

Mendeley (35)

8

CITATIONS

8 Total citations

1 Recent citation

n/a Field Citation Ratio

0.51 Relative Citation Ratio

publications

0

supporting

0

mentioning

0

contrasting

0

Smart Citations

0

0

0

0

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

• Berkvens D., Speybroeck N., Praet N., Adel A., Lesaffre E. Estimating disease prevalence in a Bayesian framework using probabilistic constraints. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) 2006, 17:145-153.
• Berkvens D.L., Speybroeck N., Lesaffre E., Saegerman C. Comments on "Pouillot, R., Gerbier, G., Gardner, I.A., 2002. 'TAGS', a program for the evaluation of test accuracy in the absence of a gold standard. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 53, 67-81". Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2003, 59:181-183.
• Black M.A., Craig B.A. Estimating disease prevalence in the absence of a gold standard. Statistics in Medicine 2002, 21:2653-2669.
• Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistics notes: Validating scales and indexes. British Medical Journal 2002, 324:606-607.
• Branscum A.J., Gardner I.A., Johnson W.O. Estimation of diagnostic-test sensitivity and specificity through Bayesian modelling. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005, 68:145-163.
• Cowling D.W., Gardner I.A., Johnson W.O. Comparison of methods for estimating individual-level prevalence based on pooled samples. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 1999, 39:211-225.
• Dendukuri N., Joseph L. Bayesian approaches to modeling the conditional dependence between multiple diagnostic tests. Biometrics 2001, 57:158-167.
• Dendukuri N., Bélisle P., Joseph L. Bayesian sample size for diagnostic test studies in the absence of a gold standard: Comparing identifiable with non-identifiable models. Statistics in Medicine 2010, 29:2688-2697.
• Dohoo I., Martin W., Stryhn H. Veterinary Epidemiologic Research 2003, 85-120. AVC, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada.
• Dunson D.B. Commentary: Practical advantages of Bayesian analysis of epidemiologic data. American Journal of Epidemiology 2001, 12:1222-1226.
• Enøe C., Georgiadis M.P., Johnson W.O. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the true disease state is unknown. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000, 45:61-81.
• European Food Safety Authority Scientific opinion of the panel on animal health and welfare (question No EFSA-Q-2008-665), adopted on 5 June 2009. Porcine brucellosis (Brucella suis). EFSA Journal 2009, 1144:1-112.
• Fisher R.A. On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 1922, 222:309-368.
• Gardner I.A. The utility of Bayes theorem and Bayesian inference in veterinary clinical practice and research. Australian Veterinary Journal 2002, 80:758-761.
• Gardner I.A., Stryhn H., Lind P., Collins M.T. Conditional dependence between tests affects the diagnosis and surveillance of animal diseases. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000, 45:107-122.
• Gart J.J., Buck A.A. Comparison of a screening test and a reference test in epidemiologic studies. II. A probabilistic model for the comparison of diagnostic tests. American Journal of Epidemiology 1966, 83:593-602.
• Gelman A., Carlin J.B., Stern H.S., Rubin D.B. Bayesian Data Analysis 2004, Chapman and Hall/CRC, London, UK, 696 pp.
• Georgiadis M.P., Johnson W.O., Gardner I.A., Singh R. Correlation-adjusted estimation of sensitivity and specificity of two diagnostic tests. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C 2003, 52:63-76.
• Godfroid J., Nielsen K., Saegerman C. Diagnosis of brucellosis in livestock and wildlife. Croatian Medical Journal 2010, 51:296-305.
• Greiner M., Gardner I.A. Application of diagnostic tests in veterinary epidemiologic studies. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000, 45:43-59.
• Hui S.L., Walter S.D. Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 1980, 36:167-171.
• Hui S.L., Zhou X.H. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1998, 7:354-370.
• Ihorst G., Forster J., Petersen G., Werchau H., Rohwedder A., Schumacher M. The use of imperfect diagnostic tests had an impact on prevalence estimation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007, 60:902-910.
• Irwig L., Macaskill P., Glasziou P., Fahey M. Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1995, 48:119-130.
• Johnson W.O., Gastwirth J.L., Pearson L.M. Screening without a "gold standard": The Hui-Walter paradigm revisited. American Journal of Epidemiology 2001, 153:921-924.
• Jones G., Johnson W.O., Hanson T.E., Christensen R. Identifiability of models for multiple diagnostic testing in the absence of a gold standard. Biometrics 2010, 66:855-863.
• Joseph L., Gyorkos T., Coupal L. Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard. American Journal of Epidemiology 1995, 141:263-272.
• Lewis F.I., Torgerson P.R. A tutorial in estimating the prevalence of disease in humans and animals in the absence of a gold standard diagnostic. Emerging Themes in Epidemiology 2012, 9:9.
• Lunn D., Spiegelhalter D., Thomas A., Best N. The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions (with discussion). Statistics in Medicine 2009, 28:3049-3082.
• Lunn D.J., Thomas A., Best N., Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: Concepts, structure, and extensibility. Statistics and Computing 2000, 10:325-337.
• Menten J., Boelaert M., Lesaffre E. Bayesian latent class models with conditionally dependent diagnostic tests: A case study. Statistics in Medicine 2008, 27:4469-4488.
• Messam, L.L.M., Branscum, A.J., Collins, M.T., Gardner, I.A., 2008. Frequentist and Bayesian approaches to prevalence estimation using examples from Johne's disease. Animal Health Research Reviews/Conference of Research Workers in Animal Diseases 9, 1-23.
• Meyer N., Vinzio S., Goichot B. La statistique Bayésienne: Une approche des statistiques adaptée la clinique. La Revue de Médecine Interne 2009, 30:242-249.
• Neyman J., Pearson E.S. On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part I. Biometrika 1928, 20A:175-240.
• Neyman J., Pearson E.S. On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference: Part II. Biometrika 1928, 20A:263-294.
• Nielsen K. Diagnosis of brucellosis by serology. Veterinary Microbiology 2002, 90:447-459.
• O'Hagan A. Bayesian statistics: Principles and benefits Wageningen UR Frontis Series 3, 31-45, accessed 12 August 2013. http://library.wur.nl/frontis/bayes/03_o_hagan.pdf.
• Pepe M.S., Janes H. Insights into latent class analysis of diagnostic test performance. Biostatistics (Oxford, England) 2007, 8:474-484.
• Plummer M. JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling accessed 2 August 2014. http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/Conferences/DSC-2003/Drafts/Plummer.pdf.
• Pouillot R. Response from R. Pouillot, G. Gerbier and I.A. Gardner to D.L. Berkvens et al. (2002). Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2003, 59:185-187.
• Pouillot R., Gerbier G., Gardner I.A. "TAGS", a program for the evaluation of test accuracy in the absence of a gold standard. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2002, 53:67-81.
• Praet N., Dorny P., Saegerman C., Marcotty T., Berkvens D. Estimation de la prévalence d'une maladie et des caractéristiques des tests diagnostiques par une approche Bayésienne. Epidémiologie et Santé Animale 2006, 49:113-130.
• Qu Y., Hagdu A. A model for evaluating the sensitivity and specificity for correlated diagnostic tests in efficacy studies with an imperfect reference test. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1998, 93:920-928.
• Rogan W.J., Gladen B. Estimating prevalence from the results of a screening test. American Journal of Epidemiology 1978, 107:71-76.
• Rutjes A., Reitsma J., Coomarasamy A., Khan K., Bossuyt P. Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technology Assessment 2007, 11:1-51.
• Saegerman C., Vo T.K.O., De Waele L., Gilson D., Bastin A., Dubray G., Flanagan P., Limet J.N., Letesson J.J., Godfroid J. Diagnosis of bovine brucellosis by skin test: Conditions for the test and evaluation of its performance. Veterinary Record 1999, 145:214-218.
• Saegerman C., De Waele L., Gilson D., Godfroid J., Thiange P., Michel P., Limbourg B., Vo T.K.O., Limet J., Letesson J.J., et al. Evaluation of three serum i-ELISAs using monoclonal antibodies and protein G as peroxidase conjugate for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Veterinary Microbiology 2004, 100:91-105.
• Saegerman C., Berkvens D., Godfroid J., Walravens K. Bovine brucellosis. Infectious and Parasitic Diseases of Livestock 2010, 971-1001. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International (CABI), Wallingford, UK/Lavoisier, Paris, France. P.-C. Lefèvre, J. Blancou, R. Chermette, G. Uilenberg (Eds.).
• Sanogo M., Thys E., Achi Y.L., Fretin D., Michel P., Abatih E., Berkvens D., Saegerman C. Bayesian estimation of true prevalence, sensitivity and specificity of Rose Bengal test and indirect ELISA for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis. The Veterinary Journal 2013, 195:114-120.
• Speybroeck N., Devleesschauwer B., Joseph L., Berkvens D. Misclassification errors in prevalence estimation: Bayesian handling with care. International Journal of Public Health 2012, 58:791-795.
• Speybroeck N., Williams C.J., Lafia K.B., Devleesschauwer B., Berkvens D. Estimating the prevalence of infections in vector populations using pools of samples. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 2012, 26:361-371.
• Spiegelhalter D.J., Best N.G., Carlin B.P., Van Der Linde A. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B. Statistical Methodology 2002, 64:583-616.
• Staquet M., Rozencweig M., Lee Y.J., Muggia F.M. Methodology for the assessment of new dichotomous diagnostic tests. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1981, 34:599-610.
• Thrusfield M. Diagnostic testing. Veterinary Epidemiology 2005, 303-330. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
• Toft N., Jorgensen E., Hojsgaard S. Diagnosing diagnostic tests: Evaluating the assumptions underlying the estimation of sensitivity and specificity in the absence of a gold standard. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005, 68:19-33.
• Vallverdú J. The false dilemma: Bayesian vs. frequentist. E-LOGOS Electronic Journal for Philosophy 2008, 1-17.
• Walter S.D., Irwig L.M. Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: A review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1988, 41:923-927.
• World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) Chapter 2.4.3. Bovine brucellosis. Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals 2009, 1-35. Paris, France, accessed 12 August 2013. http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Health_standards/tahm/2.04.03_BOVINE_BRUCELL.pdf.