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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16708778)

  • 1. Assessing the amount of heterogeneity in random-effects meta-analysis.
    Knapp G; Biggerstaff BJ; Hartung J
    Biom J; 2006 Apr; 48(2):271-85. PubMed ID: 16708778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Efficient two-step multivariate random effects meta-analysis of individual participant data for longitudinal clinical trials using mixed effects models.
    Noma H; Maruo K; Gosho M; Levine SZ; Goldberg Y; Leucht S; Furukawa TA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Feb; 19(1):33. PubMed ID: 30764757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Trial sequential methods for meta-analysis.
    Kulinskaya E; Wood J
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Sep; 5(3):212-20. PubMed ID: 26052847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A likelihood approach to meta-analysis with random effects.
    Hardy RJ; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 1996 Mar; 15(6):619-29. PubMed ID: 8731004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?
    Huedo-Medina TB; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F; Botella J
    Psychol Methods; 2006 Jun; 11(2):193-206. PubMed ID: 16784338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Meta-analytic interval estimation for standardized and unstandardized mean differences.
    Bonett DG
    Psychol Methods; 2009 Sep; 14(3):225-38. PubMed ID: 19719359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An empirical comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in 12 894 meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JP; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):195-205. PubMed ID: 26053175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random-effects meta-analysis using generalised heterogeneity statistics: should we use unequal tails?
    Jackson D; Bowden J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Sep; 16(1):118. PubMed ID: 27604952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Key concepts in clinical epidemiology: detecting and dealing with heterogeneity in meta-analyses.
    Cordero CP; Dans AL
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Feb; 130():149-151. PubMed ID: 33483004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Methods to calculate uncertainty in the estimated overall effect size from a random-effects meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Bender R; Kuss O; Langan D; Higgins JPT; Knapp G; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):23-43. PubMed ID: 30129707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis.
    Viechtbauer W
    Stat Med; 2007 Jan; 26(1):37-52. PubMed ID: 16463355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Selecting the best meta-analytic estimator for evidence-based practice: a simulation study.
    Doi SAR; Furuya-Kanamori L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2020 Mar; 18(1):86-94. PubMed ID: 31764215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The impact of stopping rules on heterogeneity of results in overviews of clinical trials.
    Hughes MD; Freedman LS; Pocock SJ
    Biometrics; 1992 Mar; 48(1):41-53. PubMed ID: 1581492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Confidence intervals for the between-study variance in random effects meta-analysis using generalised Cochran heterogeneity statistics.
    Jackson D
    Res Synth Methods; 2013 Sep; 4(3):220-9. PubMed ID: 26053842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Label-invariant models for the analysis of meta-epidemiological data.
    Rhodes KM; Mawdsley D; Turner RM; Jones HE; Savović J; Higgins JPT
    Stat Med; 2018 Jan; 37(1):60-70. PubMed ID: 28929507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A simulation study comparing properties of heterogeneity measures in meta-analyses.
    Mittlböck M; Heinzl H
    Stat Med; 2006 Dec; 25(24):4321-33. PubMed ID: 16991104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate.
    Knapp G; Hartung J
    Stat Med; 2003 Sep; 22(17):2693-710. PubMed ID: 12939780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A note on variance estimation in random effects meta-regression.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(5):823-38. PubMed ID: 16078388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Confidence intervals for random effects meta-analysis and robustness to publication bias.
    Henmi M; Copas JB
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(29):2969-83. PubMed ID: 20963748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of one-step and two-step meta-analysis models using individual patient data.
    Mathew T; Nordström K
    Biom J; 2010 Apr; 52(2):271-87. PubMed ID: 20349448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.