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 *

215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15878471)

  • 1. Uncertainty method improved on best-worst case analysis in a binary meta-analysis.
    Gamble C; Hollis S
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Jun; 58(6):579-88. PubMed ID: 15878471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of imputation and modelling methods in the analysis of a physical activity trial with missing outcomes.
    Wood AM; White IR; Hillsdon M; Carpenter J
    Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):89-99. PubMed ID: 15333619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A graphical sensitivity analysis for clinical trials with non-ignorable missing binary outcome.
    Hollis S
    Stat Med; 2002 Dec; 21(24):3823-34. PubMed ID: 12483769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Variable selection under multiple imputation using the bootstrap in a prognostic study.
    Heymans MW; van Buuren S; Knol DL; van Mechelen W; de Vet HC
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2007 Jul; 7():33. PubMed ID: 17629912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Empirical evaluation showed that the Copas selection model provided a useful summary in 80% of meta-analyses.
    Carpenter JR; Schwarzer G; Rücker G; Künstler R
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Jun; 62(6):624-631.e4. PubMed ID: 19282148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
    Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials.
    Pildal J; Hróbjartsson A; Jørgensen KJ; Hilden J; Altman DG; Gøtzsche PC
    Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Aug; 36(4):847-57. PubMed ID: 17517809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A meta-regression analysis shows no impact of design characteristics on outcome in trials on tension-type headaches.
    Verhagen AP; de Vet HC; Willemsen S; Stijnen T
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):813-8. PubMed ID: 18359608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Meta-analysis of individual patient data versus aggregate data from longitudinal clinical trials.
    Jones AP; Riley RD; Williamson PR; Whitehead A
    Clin Trials; 2009 Feb; 6(1):16-27. PubMed ID: 19254930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A meta-data based method for DNA microarray imputation.
    Jörnsten R; Ouyang M; Wang HY
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2007 Mar; 8():109. PubMed ID: 17394658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Four-fold table cell frequencies imputation in meta analysis.
    Di Pietrantonj C
    Stat Med; 2006 Jul; 25(13):2299-322. PubMed ID: 16025540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event randomized trials.
    Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2009 Mar; 104(3):546-51. PubMed ID: 19262513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Advanced statistics: missing data in clinical research--part 1: an introduction and conceptual framework.
    Haukoos JS; Newgard CD
    Acad Emerg Med; 2007 Jul; 14(7):662-8. PubMed ID: 17538078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Comparison of methods of handling missing data in individual patient data meta-analyses: an empirical example on antibiotics in children with acute otitis media.
    Koopman L; van der Heijden GJ; Grobbee DE; Rovers MM
    Am J Epidemiol; 2008 Mar; 167(5):540-5. PubMed ID: 18184640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Adjusting for partially missing baseline measurements in randomized trials.
    White IR; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2005 Apr; 24(7):993-1007. PubMed ID: 15570623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results.
    Furukawa TA; Barbui C; Cipriani A; Brambilla P; Watanabe N
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Jan; 59(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 16360555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An encouraging assessment of methods to inform priorities for updating systematic reviews.
    Sutton AJ; Donegan S; Takwoingi Y; Garner P; Gamble C; Donald A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2009 Mar; 62(3):241-51. PubMed ID: 18783919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Handling trial participants with missing outcome data when conducting a meta-analysis: a systematic survey of proposed approaches.
    Akl EA; Kahale LA; Agoritsas T; Brignardello-Petersen R; Busse JW; Carrasco-Labra A; Ebrahim S; Johnston BC; Neumann I; Sola I; Sun X; Vandvik P; Zhang Y; Alonso-Coello P; Guyatt G
    Syst Rev; 2015 Jul; 4():98. PubMed ID: 26202162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.