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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17623343)

  • 21. Random assignment of available cases: bootstrap standard errors and confidence intervals.
    Lunneborg CE
    Psychol Methods; 2001 Dec; 6(4):402-12. PubMed ID: 11778680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Relative risks and confidence intervals were easily computed indirectly from multivariable logistic regression.
    Localio AR; Margolis DJ; Berlin JA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 60(9):874-82. PubMed ID: 17689803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Meta-analysis of rare events: an update and sensitivity analysis of cardiovascular events in randomized trials of rosiglitazone.
    Dahabreh IJ; Economopoulos K
    Clin Trials; 2008; 5(2):116-20. PubMed ID: 18375649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Counterfactual links to the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker.
    Taylor JM; Wang Y; Thiébaut R
    Biometrics; 2005 Dec; 61(4):1102-11. PubMed ID: 16401284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of the risk difference, risk ratio and odds ratio scales for quantifying the unadjusted intervention effect in cluster randomized trials.
    Ukoumunne OC; Forbes AB; Carlin JB; Gulliford MC
    Stat Med; 2008 Nov; 27(25):5143-55. PubMed ID: 18613226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Strategies for analyzing multilevel cluster-randomized studies with binary outcomes collected at varying intervals of time.
    Olsen MK; DeLong ER; Oddone EZ; Bosworth HB
    Stat Med; 2008 Dec; 27(29):6055-71. PubMed ID: 18825655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Applying the law of iterated logarithm to control type I error in cumulative meta-analysis of binary outcomes.
    Hu M; Cappelleri JC; Lan KK
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(4):329-40. PubMed ID: 17848494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The analysis of continuous outcomes in multi-centre trials with small centre sizes.
    Pickering RM; Weatherall M
    Stat Med; 2007 Dec; 26(30):5445-56. PubMed ID: 17924360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Randomized trials for the real world: making as few and as reasonable assumptions as possible.
    Baker SG; Kramer BS
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Jun; 17(3):243-52. PubMed ID: 17925312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A mixed approach for proving non-inferiority in clinical trials with binary endpoints.
    Rousson V; Seifert B
    Biom J; 2008 Apr; 50(2):190-204. PubMed ID: 18311852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Two sample comparison for large groups of correlated binary responses.
    Lee EW
    Stat Med; 1996 Jun; 15(11):1187-97. PubMed ID: 8804147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Factors affecting power of tests for multiple binary outcomes.
    Mascha EJ; Imrey PB
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(28):2890-904. PubMed ID: 20862669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Using causal models to show the effect of untestable assumptions on effect estimates in randomized controlled trials.
    Allard R; Boivin JF
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(6):611-20. PubMed ID: 18042570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Interval estimation of the risk difference in non-compliance randomized trials with repeated binary measurements.
    Lui KJ
    Stat Med; 2007 Jul; 26(16):3140-56. PubMed ID: 17177272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Multiple imputation methods for treatment noncompliance and nonresponse in randomized clinical trials.
    Taylor L; Zhou XH
    Biometrics; 2009 Mar; 65(1):88-95. PubMed ID: 18397338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Influence of the way results are presented on research interpretation and medical decision making: the PRIMER collaboration randomized studies.
    Shakespeare TP; Gebski V; Tang J; Lim K; Lu JJ; Zhang X; Jiang G
    Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(1):127-37. PubMed ID: 18083993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Sample size determination for assessing equivalence based on proportion ratio under a randomized trial with non-compliance and missing outcomes.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(1):47-67. PubMed ID: 17708514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A simple alternative confidence interval for the difference between two proportions.
    Zou G; Donner A
    Control Clin Trials; 2004 Feb; 25(1):3-12. PubMed ID: 14980745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A structural equation modelling approach to the analysis of change.
    Tu YK; Baelum V; Gilthorpe MS
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2008 Aug; 116(4):291-6. PubMed ID: 18705795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes.
    Trikalinos TA; Olkin I
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(21):4279-300. PubMed ID: 18416445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.