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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17489969)

  • 1. Ordered multiple comparisons with the best and their applications to dose-response studies.
    Strassburger K; Bretz F; Finner H
    Biometrics; 2007 Dec; 63(4):1143-51. PubMed ID: 17489969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Resampling in multiple-dose factorial designs.
    Frommolt P; Hellmich M
    Biom J; 2009 Dec; 51(6):915-31. PubMed ID: 20029896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Partition testing in dose-response studies with multiple endpoints.
    Liu Y; Hsu J; Ruberg S
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):181-92. PubMed ID: 17654696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Intravenous immunoglobulin in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a dose-finding trial.
    Khan OA; Tselis A; Boster A
    Neurology; 2009 Jun; 72(24):2134; author reply 2134-5. PubMed ID: 19528523
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Multiplicity adjustment for multiple endpoints in clinical trials with multiple doses of an active treatment.
    Quan H; Luo X; Capizzi T
    Stat Med; 2005 Jul; 24(14):2151-70. PubMed ID: 15909290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dose finding - a challenge in statistics.
    Bretz F; Hsu J; Pinheiro J; Liu Y
    Biom J; 2008 Aug; 50(4):480-504. PubMed ID: 18663758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The clinical significance of new therapies for the management of periodontal disease.
    Van Dyke TE
    J Int Acad Periodontol; 2005 Oct; 7(4 Suppl):191-6. PubMed ID: 16248275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of stratified and adjusted trend tests for binomial proportions.
    Leuraud K; Benichou J
    Stat Med; 2006 Feb; 25(3):529-35. PubMed ID: 16025544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of the statistical power for multiple tests: a case study.
    Yeo A; Qu Y
    Pharm Stat; 2009; 8(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 18381588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Compatible simultaneous lower confidence bounds for the Holm procedure and other Bonferroni-based closed tests.
    Strassburger K; Bretz F
    Stat Med; 2008 Oct; 27(24):4914-27. PubMed ID: 18618415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A graphical approach to sequentially rejective multiple test procedures.
    Bretz F; Maurer W; Brannath W; Posch M
    Stat Med; 2009 Feb; 28(4):586-604. PubMed ID: 19051220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Power and sample size when multiple endpoints are considered.
    Senn S; Bretz F
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):161-70. PubMed ID: 17674404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluating co-primary endpoints collectively in clinical trials.
    Li QH
    Biom J; 2009 Feb; 51(1):137-45. PubMed ID: 19219905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. What can be learned from open direct comparative trials in multiple sclerosis?
    Khan O
    J Neurol Sci; 2009 Feb; 277 Suppl 1():S25-8. PubMed ID: 19200861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mathematical modeling of cyclic treatments of chronic myeloid leukemia.
    Komarova NL
    Math Biosci Eng; 2011 Apr; 8(2):289-306. PubMed ID: 21631131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Designing clinical trials and experiments efficiently with the program package CADEMO.
    Rasch D; Kubinger KD
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2009 Jul; 30(4):354-65. PubMed ID: 19341821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Exact analysis of dose response for multiple correlated binary outcomes.
    Han KE; Catalano PJ; Senchaudhuri P; Mehta C
    Biometrics; 2004 Mar; 60(1):216-24. PubMed ID: 15032792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.
    Revicki D; Hays RD; Cella D; Sloan J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Feb; 61(2):102-9. PubMed ID: 18177782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Confidence intervals for uncommon but dramatic responses to treatment.
    Rosenbaum PR
    Biometrics; 2007 Dec; 63(4):1164-71. PubMed ID: 17425641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of multiple ordinal endpoints.
    Häberle L; Pfahlberg A; Gefeller O
    Biom J; 2009 Feb; 51(1):217-26. PubMed ID: 19197963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.