The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for evaluating diagnostic tests and predictive models
Zou, K. H., O’Malley, A. J., & Mauri, L. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.105.594929 · Cited by 1,473
Ruopp, M. D., Perkins, N. J., Whitcomb, B. W., & Schisterman, E. F. (2008) · Biometrical Journal · doi:10.1002/bimj.200710415 · Cited by 1,320
Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., Millis, S. R., & Participants1, C. (2009) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854040903155063 · Cited by 869
Defining an Optimal Cut-Point Value in ROC Analysis: An Alternative Approach
Unal, I. (2017) · Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine · doi:10.1155/2017/3762651 · Cited by 789
Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods
Rutjes, A., Reitsma, J., Coomarasamy, A., Khan, K., & Bossuyt, P. (2007) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta11500 · Cited by 524
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhou, X., Obuchowski, N. A., & McClish, D. K.
- Venue
- Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-07-08
- ISSN
- 1940-6347 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4232875550
- Cited by
- 1,165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.98
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/9780470317082
- The paper
- Zhou, X., Obuchowski, N. A., & McClish, D. K. (2002). Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470317082
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
