184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18482060)
1. Sensitivity analysis: distributional assumptions and confounding assumptions.
Vanderweele TJ
Biometrics; 2008 Jun; 64(2):645-9. PubMed ID: 18482060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies.
Lin DY; Psaty BM; Kronmal RA
Biometrics; 1998 Sep; 54(3):948-63. PubMed ID: 9750244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Regression analysis of panel count data with dependent observation times.
Sun J; Tong X; He X
Biometrics; 2007 Dec; 63(4):1053-9. PubMed ID: 18078478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of methods to estimate the survivor average causal effect in the presence of missing data: a simulation study.
McGuinness MB; Kasza J; Karahalios A; Guymer RH; Finger RP; Simpson JA
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Dec; 19(1):223. PubMed ID: 31795945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assessing the impact of unmeasured confounding for binary outcomes using confounding functions.
Kasza J; Wolfe R; Schuster T
Int J Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 46(4):1303-1311. PubMed ID: 28338913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sensitivity analyses for unmeasured confounding assuming a marginal structural model for repeated measures.
Brumback BA; Hernán MA; Haneuse SJ; Robins JM
Stat Med; 2004 Mar; 23(5):749-67. PubMed ID: 14981673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The case-time-control design: further assumptions and conditions.
Suissa S
Epidemiology; 1998 Jul; 9(4):441-5. PubMed ID: 9647910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Bounds on controlled direct effects under monotonic assumptions about mediators and confounders.
Chiba Y
Biom J; 2010 Oct; 52(5):628-37. PubMed ID: 20886528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bias Formulas for Estimating Direct and Indirect Effects When Unmeasured Confounding Is Present.
le Cessie S
Epidemiology; 2016 Jan; 27(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 26426943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The sign of the bias of unmeasured confounding.
VanderWeele TJ
Biometrics; 2008 Sep; 64(3):702-706. PubMed ID: 18177462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Estimation in semiparametric transition measurement error models for longitudinal data.
Pan W; Zeng D; Lin X
Biometrics; 2009 Sep; 65(3):728-36. PubMed ID: 19173696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Extensions of the penalized spline of propensity prediction method of imputation.
Zhang G; Little R
Biometrics; 2009 Sep; 65(3):911-8. PubMed ID: 19053998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluating the impact of unmeasured confounding with internal validation data: an example cost evaluation in type 2 diabetes.
Faries D; Peng X; Pawaskar M; Price K; Stamey JD; Seaman JW
Value Health; 2013; 16(2):259-66. PubMed ID: 23538177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. EVALUATING COSTS WITH UNMEASURED CONFOUNDING: A SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS FOR THE TREATMENT EFFECT.
Handorf EA; Bekelman JE; Heitjan DF; Mitra N
Ann Appl Stat; 2013; 7(4):2062-2080. PubMed ID: 24587844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A More Efficient Causal Mediator Model Without the No-Unmeasured-Confounder Assumption.
Brandt H
Multivariate Behav Res; 2020; 55(4):531-552. PubMed ID: 31497999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Two-stage instrumental variable methods for estimating the causal odds ratio: analysis of bias.
Cai B; Small DS; Have TR
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(15):1809-24. PubMed ID: 21495062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sensitivity analysis for causal inference under unmeasured confounding and measurement error problems.
Díaz I; van der Laan MJ
Int J Biostat; 2013 Nov; 9(2):149-60. PubMed ID: 24246288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. How unmeasured confounding in a competing risks setting can affect treatment effect estimates in observational studies.
Barrowman MA; Peek N; Lambie M; Martin GP; Sperrin M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jul; 19(1):166. PubMed ID: 31366331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A new criterion for confounder selection.
VanderWeele TJ; Shpitser I
Biometrics; 2011 Dec; 67(4):1406-13. PubMed ID: 21627630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
