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 *

212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15882470)

  • 21. Trial sequential analyses of meta-analyses of complications in laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy: more randomized patients are needed.
    Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):246-56. PubMed ID: 20004553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A structural equation modelling approach to the analysis of change.
    Tu YK; Baelum V; Gilthorpe MS
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2008 Aug; 116(4):291-6. PubMed ID: 18705795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Much ado about nothing: a comparison of the performance of meta-analytical methods with rare events.
    Bradburn MJ; Deeks JJ; Berlin JA; Russell Localio A
    Stat Med; 2007 Jan; 26(1):53-77. PubMed ID: 16596572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The economics of the colony-stimulating factors in the prevention and treatment of febrile neutropenia.
    Lyman GH; Kuderer NM
    Crit Rev Oncol Hematol; 2004 May; 50(2):129-46. PubMed ID: 15157662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Combining summaries of binary outcomes with those of continuous outcomes in a meta-analysis.
    Whitehead A; Bailey AJ; Elbourne D
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Mar; 9(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 10091907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Meta-analysis of continuous outcome data from individual patients.
    Higgins JP; Whitehead A; Turner RM; Omar RZ; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2001 Aug; 20(15):2219-41. PubMed ID: 11468761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Is the statistical difference clinically relevant?
    Fridrik MA
    J Clin Oncol; 2005 Nov; 23(33):8537; author reply 8537-8. PubMed ID: 16293884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A comparison of the statistical power of different methods for the analysis of cluster randomization trials with binary outcomes.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2007 Aug; 26(19):3550-65. PubMed ID: 17238238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis.
    Tierney JF; Stewart LA
    Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Are samples in randomized controlled trials of psychotherapy representative of community outpatients? A new methodology and initial findings.
    Stirman SW; DeRubeis RJ; Crits-Christoph P; Brody PE
    J Consult Clin Psychol; 2003 Dec; 71(6):963-72. PubMed ID: 14622071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Meta-analysis of ordinal outcomes using individual patient data.
    Whitehead A; Omar RZ; Higgins JP; Savaluny E; Turner RM; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2001 Aug; 20(15):2243-60. PubMed ID: 11468762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comments on 'Sequential meta-analysis: an efficient decision-making tool' by I van der Tweel and C Bollen.
    Thorlund K; Imberger G; Wetterslev J; Brok J; Gluud C
    Clin Trials; 2010 Dec; 7(6):752-3; author reply 754. PubMed ID: 21138922
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Meta-analysis of well-designed nonrandomized comparative studies of surgical procedures is as good as randomized controlled trials.
    Abraham NS; Byrne CJ; Young JM; Solomon MJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):238-45. PubMed ID: 19716267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Quasi-empirical Bayes methodology for improving meta-analysis.
    Saleh AK; Hassanein KM; Hassanein RS; Kim HM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2006; 16(1):77-90. PubMed ID: 16440838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Researcher allegiance in psychotherapy outcome research: an overview of reviews.
    Munder T; Brütsch O; Leonhart R; Gerger H; Barth J
    Clin Psychol Rev; 2013 Jun; 33(4):501-11. PubMed ID: 23500154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Meta-analysis].
    D'Arrigo G; Provenzano F; Torino C; Zoccali C; Tripepi G
    G Ital Nefrol; 2011; 28(5):531-6. PubMed ID: 22028267
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Optimal information size in trial sequential analysis of time-to-event outcomes reveals potentially inconclusive results because of the risk of random error.
    Miladinovic B; Mhaskar R; Hozo I; Kumar A; Mahony H; Djulbegovic B
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Jun; 66(6):654-9. PubMed ID: 23403248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The simplest statistical test: how to check for a difference between treatments.
    Pocock SJ
    BMJ; 2006 May; 332(7552):1256-8. PubMed ID: 16735336
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Directional baseline differences and type I error probabilities in randomized clinical trials.
    Overall JE; Magee KN
    J Biopharm Stat; 1992; 2(2):189-203. PubMed ID: 1300213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Estimation of intervention effects using recurrent event time data in the presence of event dependence and a cured fraction.
    Xu Y; Lam KF; Cheung YB
    Stat Med; 2014 Jun; 33(13):2263-74. PubMed ID: 24449504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.