These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

533 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15160401)

  • 1. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression.
    Higgins JP; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2004 Jun; 23(11):1663-82. PubMed ID: 15160401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate.
    Knapp G; Hartung J
    Stat Med; 2003 Sep; 22(17):2693-710. PubMed ID: 12939780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses: a simulation study of Bayesian and frequentist implementations of three models.
    Dohoo I; Stryhn H; Sanchez J
    Prev Vet Med; 2007 Sep; 81(1-3):38-55. PubMed ID: 17477995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?
    Huedo-Medina TB; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F; Botella J
    Psychol Methods; 2006 Jun; 11(2):193-206. PubMed ID: 16784338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inflation of type I error rate in two statistical tests for the detection of publication bias in meta-analyses with binary outcomes.
    Schwarzer G; Antes G; Schumacher M
    Stat Med; 2002 Sep; 21(17):2465-77. PubMed ID: 12205693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Higher-order likelihood inference in meta-analysis and meta-regression.
    Guolo A
    Stat Med; 2012 Feb; 31(4):313-27. PubMed ID: 22173666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A simulation study comparing properties of heterogeneity measures in meta-analyses.
    Mittlböck M; Heinzl H
    Stat Med; 2006 Dec; 25(24):4321-33. PubMed ID: 16991104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Extreme between-study homogeneity in meta-analyses could offer useful insights.
    Ioannidis JP; Trikalinos TA; Zintzaras E
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Oct; 59(10):1023-32. PubMed ID: 16980141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis.
    Macaskill P; Walter SD; Irwig L
    Stat Med; 2001 Feb; 20(4):641-54. PubMed ID: 11223905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Trial sequential analysis reveals insufficient information size and potentially false positive results in many meta-analyses.
    Brok J; Thorlund K; Gluud C; Wetterslev J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):763-9. PubMed ID: 18411040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Applying the law of iterated logarithm to control type I error in cumulative meta-analysis of binary outcomes.
    Hu M; Cappelleri JC; Lan KK
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(4):329-40. PubMed ID: 17848494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Individual patient-level and study-level meta-analysis for investigating modifiers of treatment effect.
    Teramukai S; Matsuyama Y; Mizuno S; Sakamoto J
    Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2004 Dec; 34(12):717-21. PubMed ID: 15640501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Investigating heterogeneity in an individual patient data meta-analysis of time to event outcomes.
    Smith CT; Williamson PR; Marson AG
    Stat Med; 2005 May; 24(9):1307-19. PubMed ID: 15685717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses?
    Thorlund K; Devereaux PJ; Wetterslev J; Guyatt G; Ioannidis JP; Thabane L; Gluud LL; Als-Nielsen B; Gluud C
    Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 38(1):276-86. PubMed ID: 18824467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of permutation and mixed-model regression methods for the analysis of simulated data in the context of a group-randomized trial.
    Murray DM; Hannan PJ; Pals SP; McCowen RG; Baker WL; Blitstein JL
    Stat Med; 2006 Feb; 25(3):375-88. PubMed ID: 16143991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A generalized weighting regression-derived meta-analysis estimator robust to small-study effects and heterogeneity.
    Moreno SG; Sutton AJ; Thompson JR; Ades AE; Abrams KR; Cooper NJ
    Stat Med; 2012 Jun; 31(14):1407-17. PubMed ID: 22351645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Performance of the trim and fill method in the presence of publication bias and between-study heterogeneity.
    Peters JL; Sutton AJ; Jones DR; Abrams KR; Rushton L
    Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(25):4544-62. PubMed ID: 17476644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An adaptive test of significance for a subset of regression coefficients.
    O'Gorman TW
    Stat Med; 2002 Nov; 21(22):3527-42. PubMed ID: 12407688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in combining results of studies.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    Stat Med; 2007 Apr; 26(9):1964-81. PubMed ID: 16955539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test studies using individual patient data and aggregate data.
    Riley RD; Dodd SR; Craig JV; Thompson JR; Williamson PR
    Stat Med; 2008 Dec; 27(29):6111-36. PubMed ID: 18816508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 27.