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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16185467)

  • 21. Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders.
    Cepeda MS; Boston R; Farrar JT; Strom BL
    Am J Epidemiol; 2003 Aug; 158(3):280-7. PubMed ID: 12882951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.
    Lunceford JK; Davidian M
    Stat Med; 2004 Oct; 23(19):2937-60. PubMed ID: 15351954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks.
    Austin PC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Jun; 61(6):537-45. PubMed ID: 18471657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Avoiding pitfalls when combining multiple imputation and propensity scores.
    Granger E; Sergeant JC; Lunt M
    Stat Med; 2019 Nov; 38(26):5120-5132. PubMed ID: 31512265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Too much ado about propensity score models? Comparing methods of propensity score matching.
    Baser O
    Value Health; 2006; 9(6):377-85. PubMed ID: 17076868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Conditioning on the propensity score can result in biased estimation of common measures of treatment effect: a Monte Carlo study (p n/a) by Peter C. Austin, Paul Grootendorst, Sharon-Lise T. Normand, Geoffrey M. Anderson, Statistics in Medicine, Published Online: 16 June 2006. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2618.
    Martens EP; Pestman WR; Klungel OH
    Stat Med; 2007 Jul; 26(16):3208-10; author reply 3210-2. PubMed ID: 17373674
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Results of multivariable logistic regression, propensity matching, propensity adjustment, and propensity-based weighting under conditions of nonuniform effect.
    Kurth T; Walker AM; Glynn RJ; Chan KA; Gaziano JM; Berger K; Robins JM
    Am J Epidemiol; 2006 Feb; 163(3):262-70. PubMed ID: 16371515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Using Super Learner Prediction Modeling to Improve High-dimensional Propensity Score Estimation.
    Wyss R; Schneeweiss S; van der Laan M; Lendle SD; Ju C; Franklin JM
    Epidemiology; 2018 Jan; 29(1):96-106. PubMed ID: 28991001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Data-Adaptive Bias-Reduced Doubly Robust Estimation.
    Vermeulen K; Vansteelandt S
    Int J Biostat; 2016 May; 12(1):253-82. PubMed ID: 27227724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Propensity score balance measures in pharmacoepidemiology: a simulation study.
    Ali MS; Groenwold RH; Pestman WR; Belitser SV; Roes KC; Hoes AW; de Boer A; Klungel OH
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2014 Aug; 23(8):802-11. PubMed ID: 24478163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Bayesian propensity score analysis for observational data.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2009 Jan; 28(1):94-112. PubMed ID: 19012268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Regularized Regression Versus the High-Dimensional Propensity Score for Confounding Adjustment in Secondary Database Analyses.
    Franklin JM; Eddings W; Glynn RJ; Schneeweiss S
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Oct; 182(7):651-9. PubMed ID: 26233956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Stratification for the propensity score compared with linear regression techniques to assess the effect of treatment or exposure.
    Senn S; Graf E; Caputo A
    Stat Med; 2007 Dec; 26(30):5529-44. PubMed ID: 18058851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Performance of propensity score methods when comparison groups originate from different data sources.
    Hammill BG; Curtis LH; Setoguchi S
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2012 May; 21 Suppl 2():81-9. PubMed ID: 22552983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Variance estimation for stratified propensity score estimators.
    Williamson EJ; Morley R; Lucas A; Carpenter JR
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(15):1617-32. PubMed ID: 22362427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Studies with many covariates and few outcomes: selecting covariates and implementing propensity-score-based confounding adjustments.
    Patorno E; Glynn RJ; Hernández-Díaz S; Liu J; Schneeweiss S
    Epidemiology; 2014 Mar; 25(2):268-78. PubMed ID: 24487209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Prognostic models and the propensity score.
    Drake C; Fisher L
    Int J Epidemiol; 1995 Feb; 24(1):183-7. PubMed ID: 7797341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of instrumental variable analysis using a new instrument with risk adjustment methods to reduce confounding by indication.
    Fang G; Brooks JM; Chrischilles EA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Jun; 175(11):1142-51. PubMed ID: 22510277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comment: Analyzing propensity score matched count data.
    Li L
    Int J Biostat; 2010; 6(1):Article 5. PubMed ID: 21969989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Evaluating large-scale propensity score performance through real-world and synthetic data experiments.
    Tian Y; Schuemie MJ; Suchard MA
    Int J Epidemiol; 2018 Dec; 47(6):2005-2014. PubMed ID: 29939268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.