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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1601533)

  • 101. [Principles of statistical methodology in medicine XII. Interpretation of results in statistical tests].
    Holcík J; Gerylovová A
    Vnitr Lek; 1975 Jul; 21(7):724-8. PubMed ID: 1146245
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 102. "Percentaging" contingency tables: It really does matter how you do it.
    Knapp TR
    Res Nurs Health; 2015 Aug; 38(4):323-5. PubMed ID: 25990211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 103. On establishing reference values.
    Lumsden JH; Mullen K
    Can J Comp Med; 1978 Jul; 42(3):293-301. PubMed ID: 688072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 104. [The development of tables for optimal sample sizes using tests based on binomial distributions (author's transl)].
    Bortz J; Osterreich R; Vogelbusch W
    Arch Psychol (Frankf); 1979; 131(4):267-92. PubMed ID: 547977
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 105. Sample size for pre-tests of questionnaires.
    Perneger TV; Courvoisier DS; Hudelson PM; Gayet-Ageron A
    Qual Life Res; 2015 Jan; 24(1):147-51. PubMed ID: 25008261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 106. An aid to decision-making in bioequivalence assessment.
    Fluehler H; Hirtz J; Moser HA
    J Pharmacokinet Biopharm; 1981 Apr; 9(2):235-43. PubMed ID: 7277212
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 107. A review of tests for detecting a monotone dose-response relationship with ordinal response data.
    Chuang-Stein G; Agresti A
    Stat Med; 1997 Nov; 16(22):2599-618. PubMed ID: 9403959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 108. "Not statistically different" does not necessarily mean "the same": the important but underappreciated distinction between difference and equivalence studies.
    Harris AH; Fernandes-Taylor S; Giori N
    J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2012 Mar; 94(5):e29. PubMed ID: 22398743
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 109. Sample size determination for pair-matched case-control studies where the goal is interval estimation of the odds ratio.
    Satten GA; Kupper LL
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1990; 43(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 2319281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 110. Comments on 'Likelihood ratio and score tests to test the non-inferiority (or equivalence) of the odds ratio in a crossover study with binary outcomes'.
    Lui KJ
    Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(1):197-198. PubMed ID: 27917554
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 111. Estimation of reference ranges from normal samples.
    Royston P; Matthews JN
    Stat Med; 1991 May; 10(5):691-5. PubMed ID: 2068421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 112. Determining reference ranges and sample sizes in parallel-group studies.
    Shieh G
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(11):e0278447. PubMed ID: 36449490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 113. Comments on 'Test non-inferiority (and equivalence) based on the odds ratio under a simple crossover trial'.
    Lui KJ
    Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(16):2845-6. PubMed ID: 27264023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 114. Comment on: Updates of bioequivalence programs (including statistical power approximated by Student's t).
    Hauschke D
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 1995 Jun; 47(1):93-4. PubMed ID: 7554866
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 115. Re: Exact tests of equivalence and efficacy with a non-zero lower bound for comparative studies by I. S. F. Chan, Statistics in Medicine, 17, 1403-1413 (1998).
    Röhmel J; Mansmann U
    Stat Med; 1999 Jul; 18(13):1734-7. PubMed ID: 10407241
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 116. Evaluation of bioequivalence studies.
    Grieve AP
    Eur J Clin Pharmacol; 1991; 40(2):201-3. PubMed ID: 2065704
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 117. Testing equivalence between two laboratories or two methods using paired-sample analysis and interval hypothesis testing.
    Feng S; Liang Q; Kinser RD; Newland K; Guilbaud R
    Anal Bioanal Chem; 2006 Jul; 385(5):975-81. PubMed ID: 16791581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 118. Are simple comparative studies always simple? The role of t-tests in comparative analytical experiments.
    Mullins E
    Analyst; 2002 Feb; 127(2):207-13. PubMed ID: 11913862
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 119. On the determination of sample sizes in designing experiments.
    HARRIS M; HORVITZ DG; MOOD AM
    J Am Stat Assoc; 1948 Sep; 43(243):391-402. PubMed ID: 18888135
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 120. Letter to the editor by the authors of Exact Calculation of Power and Sample Size in Bioequivalence Studies Using Two One-sided Tests, Pharmaceutical Statistics, DOI: 10.1002/pst.1666.
    Shen M; Russek-Cohen E; Slud EV
    Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(3):272. PubMed ID: 25807931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.