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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19127473)

  • 1. An application of linear mixed effects model to assess the agreement between two methods with replicated observations.
    Roy A
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009; 19(1):150-73. PubMed ID: 19127473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessing observer agreement in studies involving replicated binary observations.
    Haber M; Gao J; Barnhart HX
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):757-66. PubMed ID: 17613652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessing individual agreement.
    Barnhart HX; Kosinski AS; Haber MJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):697-719. PubMed ID: 17613649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient and coefficient of individual agreement in assessing agreement.
    Barnhart HX; Lokhnygina Y; Kosinski AS; Haber M
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):721-38. PubMed ID: 17613650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Estimation of the concordance correlation coefficient for repeated measures using SAS and R.
    Carrasco JL; Phillips BR; Puig-Martinez J; King TS; Chinchilli VM
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2013 Mar; 109(3):293-304. PubMed ID: 23031487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A procedure for determining whether a simple combination of diagnostic tests may be noninferior to the theoretical optimum combination.
    Jin H; Lu Y
    Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(6):909-16. PubMed ID: 18556633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimal Combinations of Diagnostic Tests Based on AUC.
    Huang X; Qin G; Fang Y
    Biometrics; 2011 Jun; 67(2):568-76. PubMed ID: 20560934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cluster analysis using multivariate mixed effects models.
    Villarroel L; Marshall G; Barón AE
    Stat Med; 2009 Sep; 28(20):2552-65. PubMed ID: 19536743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Testing for interaction in two-way random and mixed effects models: the fully nonparametric approach.
    Gaugler T; Akritas MG
    Biometrics; 2011 Dec; 67(4):1314-20. PubMed ID: 21401567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Testing for misspecification in generalized linear mixed models.
    Abad AA; Litière S; Molenberghs G
    Biostatistics; 2010 Oct; 11(4):771-86. PubMed ID: 20407039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data.
    Stijnen T; Hamza TH; Ozdemir P
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(29):3046-67. PubMed ID: 20827667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Goodness-of-fit in generalized nonlinear mixed-effects models.
    Vonesh EF; Chinchilli VM; Pu K
    Biometrics; 1996 Jun; 52(2):572-87. PubMed ID: 10766504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Two-sided tolerance intervals for balanced and unbalanced random effects models.
    Hoffman D; Kringle R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(2):283-93. PubMed ID: 15796296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment of disagreement: a new information-based approach.
    Costa-Santos C; Antunes L; Souto A; Bernardes J
    Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Jul; 20(7):555-61. PubMed ID: 20538199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Methods of monitoring of respiration and blood circulation].
    Salorinne Y
    Duodecim; 1977; 93(21):1308-24. PubMed ID: 604031
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Statistical models for autocorrelated count data.
    Nelson KP; Leroux BG
    Stat Med; 2006 Apr; 25(8):1413-30. PubMed ID: 16196078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Resampling dependent concordance correlation coefficients.
    Williamson JM; Crawford SB; Lin HM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):685-96. PubMed ID: 17613648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The analysis of very small samples of repeated measurements I: an adjusted sandwich estimator.
    Skene SS; Kenward MG
    Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(27):2825-37. PubMed ID: 20839367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A new classification rule for incomplete doubly multivariate data using mixed effects model with performance comparisons on the imputed data.
    Roy A
    Stat Med; 2006 May; 25(10):1715-28. PubMed ID: 16220496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.