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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15580599)

  • 1. Efficiency of the cross-over design: an empirical estimation.
    Garcia R; Benet M; Arnau C; Cobo E
    Stat Med; 2004 Dec; 23(24):3773-80. PubMed ID: 15580599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Power comparison of robust approximate and non-parametric tests for the analysis of cross-over trials.
    Correa JA; Bellavance F
    Stat Med; 2001 Apr; 20(8):1185-96. PubMed ID: 11304735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The fallacy of enrolling only high-risk subjects in cancer prevention trials: is there a "free lunch"?
    Baker SG; Kramer BS; Corle D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2004 Oct; 4():24. PubMed ID: 15461821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evidence from crossover trials: empirical evaluation and comparison against parallel arm trials.
    Lathyris DN; Trikalinos TA; Ioannidis JP
    Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Apr; 36(2):422-30. PubMed ID: 17301102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cross-over trials with censored data.
    Feingold M; Gillespie BW
    Stat Med; 1996 May; 15(10):953-67. PubMed ID: 8783435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sample size calculation for cluster randomized cross-over trials.
    Giraudeau B; Ravaud P; Donner A
    Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(27):5578-85. PubMed ID: 18646266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sample size, power calculations, and their implications for the cost of thorough studies of drug induced QT interval prolongation.
    Malik M; Hnatkova K; Batchvarov V; Gang Y; Smetana P; Camm AJ
    Pacing Clin Electrophysiol; 2004 Dec; 27(12):1659-69. PubMed ID: 15613131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Implementing a decision-theoretic design in clinical trials: why and how?
    Palmer CR; Shahumyan H
    Stat Med; 2007 Nov; 26(27):4939-57. PubMed ID: 17582801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Sample sizes for clinical trials with normal data.
    Julious SA
    Stat Med; 2004 Jun; 23(12):1921-86. PubMed ID: 15195324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sample size re-estimation in cluster randomization trials.
    Lake S; Kammann E; Klar N; Betensky R
    Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(10):1337-50. PubMed ID: 12185888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Study designs to compare new colonoscopic techniques: clinical considerations, data analysis, and sample size calculations.
    van den Broek FJ; Kuiper T; Dekker E; Zwinderman AH; Fockens P; Reitsma JB
    Endoscopy; 2013 Nov; 45(11):922-7. PubMed ID: 23918622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Adaptive design and estimation in randomized clinical trials with correlated observations.
    Yin G; Shen Y
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):362-9. PubMed ID: 16011682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improvement in the quality of randomized controlled trials among general anesthesiology journals 2000 to 2006: a 6-year follow-up.
    Greenfield ML; Mhyre JM; Mashour GA; Blum JM; Yen EC; Rosenberg AL
    Anesth Analg; 2009 Jun; 108(6):1916-21. PubMed ID: 19448222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The intention-to-treat approach in randomized controlled trials: are authors saying what they do and doing what they say?
    Gravel J; Opatrny L; Shapiro S
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(4):350-6. PubMed ID: 17848496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Meta-analysis combining parallel and cross-over clinical trials. III: The issue of carry-over.
    Curtin F; Elbourne D; Altman DG
    Stat Med; 2002 Aug; 21(15):2161-73. PubMed ID: 12210631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Parametric versus non-parametric statistics in the analysis of randomized trials with non-normally distributed data.
    Vickers AJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2005 Nov; 5():35. PubMed ID: 16269081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reliability, effect size, and responsiveness of health status measures in the design of randomized and cluster-randomized trials.
    Diehr P; Chen L; Patrick D; Feng Z; Yasui Y
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2005 Feb; 26(1):45-58. PubMed ID: 15837452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [The N-of-1 trial: the ideal study design that is underused].
    Vandenbroucke JP
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2007 Jun; 114(6):260-2. PubMed ID: 17695213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Individual allocation had an advantage over cluster randomization in statistical efficiency in some circumstances.
    Hewitt CE; Torgerson DJ; Miles JN
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 61(10):1004-8. PubMed ID: 18411038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Bibliographic study showed improving methodology of meta-analyses published in leading journals 1993-2002.
    Gerber S; Tallon D; Trelle S; Schneider M; Jüni P; Egger M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Aug; 60(8):773-80. PubMed ID: 17606172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.