Prostate Cancer Test Network
Cross-source consensus on Prostate Cancer Test Network from 1 sources and 5 claims.
1 sources · 5 claims
Benefits
Preparation
Risks & contraindications
Comparisons
Where it comes from
Highlighted claims
- The prostate cancer application included four tests across 37 studies in a connected network. — Meta-analysis of networks of diagnostic tests with binary and continuous results
- The standard Nyaga ANOVA model could not be fitted for the prostate comparison after common-threshold selection because no connected evidence network remained. — Meta-analysis of networks of diagnostic tests with binary and continuous results
- SelectMDx was treated as binary because too few thresholds were reported to estimate a threshold-accuracy relationship reliably. — Meta-analysis of networks of diagnostic tests with binary and continuous results
- The meta-regression model had the lowest DIC in the prostate cancer dataset, consistent with the sparse network. — Meta-analysis of networks of diagnostic tests with binary and continuous results
- PHI at threshold 35 showed high sensitivity but modest specificity in the prostate cancer estimates. — Meta-analysis of networks of diagnostic tests with binary and continuous results