SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Hui, S. L. and Walter, S. D. (1980) Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. Biometrics, 36, 167171.
  • 2
    Pepe, M. and Janes, H. (2007) Insights into latent class analysis of diagnostic test performance. Biostatistics, 8, 474484.
  • 3
    Sinclair, M. D. and Gastwirth, J. L. (1996) On procedures for evaluating the effectiveness of reinterview survey methods: application to labor force data. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 961969.
  • 4
    Line, B.R., Peters, T. L. and Keenan, J. (1997) Diagnostic test comparisons in patients with Deep Venous Thrombosis. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 38, 8992.
  • 5
    Gastwirth, J. L., Johnson, W. O. and Hikawa, H. (2011) Estimating the fraction of “non-genuine” artwork by Henry Moore on eBay: application of latent class screening test methodology. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 174 (in press).
  • 6
    Pouillot, R., Gerbier, G. and Gardner, I. A. (2002) “TAGS”, a program for the evaluation of test accuracy in the absence of a gold standard. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 53, 6771.
  • 7
    Spencer, B. (2010) When do latent class models overstate accuracy for binary classifiers? (in press).
  • 8
    Sinclair, M. D. and Gastwirth, J. L. (2000) Properties of the Hui and Walter and related methods for estimating prevalence rates and error rates of diagnostic testing procedures. Drug Information Journal, 34, 605615.
  • 9
    Dendukuri, N. and Joseph, L. (2001) Bayesian approaches to modeling the conditional dependence between multiple diagnostic tests. Biometrics, 57, 158167.
  • 10
    576 F. Supp. 2d 463 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) and 600 F. 3d 93 (2d. Cir. 2010).
  • 11
    Goldwasser, K. (2010) Knock it off: An analysis of trademark counterfeit goods regulation in the United States, France and Belgium. Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 18, 207238.
  • 12
    Levin, E. K. (2009) A safe harbor for trademark: Reevaluating secondary trademark liability after Tiffany v. eBay. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 24, 491527.