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 *

88 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15839577)

  • 1. Comparison of step-stress data among multiple groups.
    Craft JL; Bailer AJ
    Environ Toxicol Chem; 2005 Apr; 24(4):1004-6. PubMed ID: 15839577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A parametric model for studying organism fitness using step-stress experiments.
    Greven S; Bailer AJ; Kupper LL; Muller KE; Craft JL
    Biometrics; 2004 Sep; 60(3):793-9. PubMed ID: 15339303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Part 1. Statistical Learning Methods for the Effects of Multiple Air Pollution Constituents.
    Coull BA; Bobb JF; Wellenius GA; Kioumourtzoglou MA; Mittleman MA; Koutrakis P; Godleski JJ
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2015 Jun; (183 Pt 1-2):5-50. PubMed ID: 26333238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. An empirical comparison of statistical tests for assessing the proportional hazards assumption of Cox's model.
    Ng'andu NH
    Stat Med; 1997 Mar; 16(6):611-26. PubMed ID: 9131751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Regression analysis of a disease onset distribution using diagnosis data.
    Young JG; Jewell NP; Samuels SJ
    Biometrics; 2008 Mar; 64(1):20-8. PubMed ID: 17680832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Estimating the survival functions for right-censored and interval-censored data with piecewise constant hazard functions.
    He P; Kong G; Su Z
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2013 Jul; 35(2):122-7. PubMed ID: 23664967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Dealing with the proportional hazards assumption when using the proportional hazards model with a single independent variable.
    Shibata A; Hamajima N; Tamakoshi A; Suzuki S; Sasaki R; Aoki K
    Jpn J Clin Oncol; 1989 Sep; 19(3):195-201. PubMed ID: 2810819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of methods for estimating the attributable risk in the context of survival analysis.
    Gassama M; Bénichou J; Dartois L; Thiébaut AC
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jan; 17(1):10. PubMed ID: 28114895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Testing the proportional odds model for interval-censored data.
    Sun J; Sun L; Zhu C
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2007 Mar; 13(1):37-50. PubMed ID: 17160547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Data-driven smooth tests of the proportional hazards assumption.
    Kraus D
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2007 Mar; 13(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 17115257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sequential tests for non-proportional hazards data.
    Brückner M; Brannath W
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2017 Jul; 23(3):339-352. PubMed ID: 26969674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of different parametric proportional hazards models for interval-censored data: a simulation study.
    Gong Q; Fang L
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2013 Sep; 36(1):276-83. PubMed ID: 23916917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Average Hazard Ratio - A Good Effect Measure for Time-to-event Endpoints when the Proportional Hazard Assumption is Violated?
    Rauch G; Brannath W; Brückner M; Kieser M
    Methods Inf Med; 2018 May; 57(3):89-100. PubMed ID: 29719915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The power of the Mantel-Haenszel test for grouped failure time data.
    Wallenstein S; Wittes J
    Biometrics; 1993 Dec; 49(4):1077-87. PubMed ID: 8117902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Statistical inference methods for two crossing survival curves: a comparison of methods.
    Li H; Han D; Hou Y; Chen H; Chen Z
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(1):e0116774. PubMed ID: 25615624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. How to Compare the Length of Stay of Two Samples of Inpatients? A Simulation Study to Compare Type I and Type II Errors of 12 Statistical Tests.
    Chazard E; Ficheur G; Beuscart JB; Preda C
    Value Health; 2017; 20(7):992-998. PubMed ID: 28712630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models.
    Bender R; Augustin T; Blettner M
    Stat Med; 2005 Jun; 24(11):1713-23. PubMed ID: 15724232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bayesian inference in a piecewise Weibull proportional hazards model with unknown change points.
    Casellas J
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2007 Aug; 124(4):176-84. PubMed ID: 17651319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Estimation of the environmental risk posed by landfills using chemical, microbiological and ecotoxicological testing of leachates.
    Matejczyk M; Płaza GA; Nałęcz-Jawecki G; Ulfig K; Markowska-Szczupak A
    Chemosphere; 2011 Feb; 82(7):1017-23. PubMed ID: 21087786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Interpretation of toxicologic data in clinical environmental medicine].
    Drexler H; Göen T
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 1998 Jun; 123(25-26):807-13. PubMed ID: 9672489
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.