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 *

186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19008067)

  • 1. The impact of loss to follow-up on hypothesis tests of the treatment effect for several statistical methods in substance abuse clinical trials.
    Hedden SL; Woolson RF; Carter RE; Palesch Y; Upadhyaya HP; Malcolm RJ
    J Subst Abuse Treat; 2009 Jul; 37(1):54-63. PubMed ID: 19008067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. MMRM versus MI in dealing with missing data--a comparison based on 25 NDA data sets.
    Siddiqui O
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 May; 21(3):423-36. PubMed ID: 21442517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials.
    Zhang Y; Alyass A; Vanniyasingam T; Sadeghirad B; Flórez ID; Pichika SC; Kennedy SA; Abdulkarimova U; Zhang Y; Iljon T; Morgano GP; Colunga Lozano LE; Aloweni FAB; Lopes LC; Yepes-Nuñez JJ; Fei Y; Wang L; Kahale LA; Meyre D; Akl EA; Thabane L; Guyatt GH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 88():67-80. PubMed ID: 28579378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. MMRM vs. LOCF: a comprehensive comparison based on simulation study and 25 NDA datasets.
    Siddiqui O; Hung HM; O'Neill R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009; 19(2):227-46. PubMed ID: 19212876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparisons of methods for analysis of repeated binary responses with missing data.
    Frank Liu G; Zhan X
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 May; 21(3):371-92. PubMed ID: 21442514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An overview of practical approaches for handling missing data in clinical trials.
    DeSouza CM; Legedza AT; Sankoh AJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Nov; 19(6):1055-73. PubMed ID: 20183464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Modern statistical methods for handling missing repeated measurements in obesity trial data: beyond LOCF.
    Gadbury GL; Coffey CS; Allison DB
    Obes Rev; 2003 Aug; 4(3):175-84. PubMed ID: 12916818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A bias correction in testing treatment efficacy under informative dropout in clinical trials.
    Kong F; Chen YF; Jin K
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Nov; 19(6):980-1000. PubMed ID: 20183460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Missing radiographic data handling in randomized clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis.
    Huang X; Jiao L; Wei L; Quan H; Teoh L; Koch GG
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(6):1435-52. PubMed ID: 24138441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Marginal analysis of incomplete longitudinal binary data: a cautionary note on LOCF imputation.
    Cook RJ; Zeng L; Yi GY
    Biometrics; 2004 Sep; 60(3):820-8. PubMed ID: 15339307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Handling missing quality of life data in HIV clinical trials: what is practical?
    Fairclough DL; Thijs H; Huang IC; Finnern HW; Wu AW
    Qual Life Res; 2008 Feb; 17(1):61-73. PubMed ID: 18071926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of data analysis strategies for intent-to-treat analysis in pre-test-post-test designs with substantial dropout rates.
    Salim A; Mackinnon A; Christensen H; Griffiths K
    Psychiatry Res; 2008 Sep; 160(3):335-45. PubMed ID: 18718673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analyzing weight loss intervention studies with missing data: which methods should be used?
    Batterham MJ; Tapsell LC; Charlton KE
    Nutrition; 2013; 29(7-8):1024-9. PubMed ID: 23644010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How should we deal with missing data in clinical trials involving Alzheimer's disease patients?
    Coley N; Gardette V; Cantet C; Gillette-Guyonnet S; Nourhashemi F; Vellas B; Andrieu S
    Curr Alzheimer Res; 2011 Jun; 8(4):421-33. PubMed ID: 21244348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of alternative strategies for analysis of longitudinal trials with dropouts.
    Liu G; Gould AL
    J Biopharm Stat; 2002 May; 12(2):207-26. PubMed ID: 12413241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Handling of Missing Outcome Data in Acute Stroke Trials: Advantages of Multiple Imputation Using Baseline and Postbaseline Variables.
    Young-Saver DF; Gornbein J; Starkman S; Saver JL
    J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis; 2018 Dec; 27(12):3662-3669. PubMed ID: 30297167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Estimating the effect of multiple imputation on incomplete longitudinal data with application to a randomized clinical study.
    Fong DY; Rai SN; Lam KS
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(5):1004-22. PubMed ID: 23957512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Missing data in alcohol clinical trials: a comparison of methods.
    Hallgren KA; Witkiewitz K
    Alcohol Clin Exp Res; 2013 Dec; 37(12):2152-60. PubMed ID: 23889334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Allowing for uncertainty due to missing and LOCF imputed outcomes in meta-analysis.
    Mavridis D; Salanti G; Furukawa TA; Cipriani A; Chaimani A; White IR
    Stat Med; 2019 Feb; 38(5):720-737. PubMed ID: 30347460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Handling drop-out in longitudinal clinical trials: a comparison of the LOCF and MMRM approaches.
    Lane P
    Pharm Stat; 2008; 7(2):93-106. PubMed ID: 17351897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.