BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16984318)

  • 1. The performance of random coefficient regression in accounting for residual confounding.
    Gustafson P; Greenland S
    Biometrics; 2006 Sep; 62(3):760-8. PubMed ID: 16984318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bayesian perspectives for epidemiological research. II. Regression analysis.
    Greenland S
    Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Feb; 36(1):195-202. PubMed ID: 17329317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Bayesian modelling of lung cancer risk and bitumen fume exposure adjusted for unmeasured confounding by smoking.
    de Vocht F; Kromhout H; Ferro G; Boffetta P; Burstyn I
    Occup Environ Med; 2009 Aug; 66(8):502-8. PubMed ID: 19060029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A sensitivity analysis using information about measured confounders yielded improved uncertainty assessments for unmeasured confounding.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy AR
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Mar; 61(3):247-55. PubMed ID: 18226747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Hierarchical priors for bias parameters in Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy AR; Richardson S
    Stat Med; 2012 Feb; 31(4):383-96. PubMed ID: 22253142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The sign of the unmeasured confounding bias under various standard populations.
    Chiba Y
    Biom J; 2009 Aug; 51(4):670-6. PubMed ID: 19650054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Frequentist performance of Bayesian confidence intervals for comparing proportions in 2 x 2 contingency tables.
    Agresti A; Min Y
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):515-23. PubMed ID: 16011699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy A
    Stat Med; 2007 May; 26(11):2331-47. PubMed ID: 16998821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Marginalized models for moderate to long series of longitudinal binary response data.
    Schildcrout JS; Heagerty PJ
    Biometrics; 2007 Jun; 63(2):322-31. PubMed ID: 17688485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Adjusting for bias and unmeasured confounding in Mendelian randomization studies with binary responses.
    Palmer TM; Thompson JR; Tobin MD; Sheehan NA; Burton PR
    Int J Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 37(5):1161-8. PubMed ID: 18463132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Interpreting treatment-effect estimates with heterogeneity and choice: simulation model results.
    Brooks JM; Fang G
    Clin Ther; 2009 Apr; 31(4):902-19. PubMed ID: 19446162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Improved estimation of controlled direct effects in the presence of unmeasured confounding of intermediate variables.
    Kaufman S; Kaufman JS; MacLehose RF; Greenland S; Poole C
    Stat Med; 2005 Jun; 24(11):1683-702. PubMed ID: 15742358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Multilevel modeling and model averaging.
    Greenland S
    Scand J Work Environ Health; 1999; 25 Suppl 4():43-8. PubMed ID: 10628440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bayesian decision-theoretic group sequential clinical trial design based on a quadratic loss function: a frequentist evaluation.
    Lewis RJ; Lipsky AM; Berry DA
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(1):5-14. PubMed ID: 17327241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Five interval estimators for proportion ratio under a stratified randomized clinical trial with noncompliance.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    Biom J; 2007 Aug; 49(4):613-26. PubMed ID: 17634977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Semiparametric inference for surrogate endpoints with bivariate censored data.
    Ghosh D
    Biometrics; 2008 Mar; 64(1):149-56. PubMed ID: 17651457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Bayesian approach to a logistic regression model with incomplete information.
    Choi T; Schervish MJ; Schmitt KA; Small MJ
    Biometrics; 2008 Jun; 64(2):424-30. PubMed ID: 17764482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bayesian nonparametric estimation of continuous monotone functions with applications to dose-response analysis.
    Bornkamp B; Ickstadt K
    Biometrics; 2009 Mar; 65(1):198-205. PubMed ID: 18510655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of residual smoothing on the posterior of the fixed effects in disease-mapping models.
    Reich BJ; Hodges JS; Zadnik V
    Biometrics; 2006 Dec; 62(4):1197-206. PubMed ID: 17156295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A technique for measuring epidemiologically useful features of birthweight distributions.
    Umbach DM; Wilcox AJ
    Stat Med; 1996 Jul; 15(13):1333-48. PubMed ID: 8841645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.