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 *

564 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19650054)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Adjusting for bias and unmeasured confounding in Mendelian randomization studies with binary responses.
    Palmer TM; Thompson JR; Tobin MD; Sheehan NA; Burton PR
    Int J Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 37(5):1161-8. PubMed ID: 18463132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. A sensitivity analysis using information about measured confounders yielded improved uncertainty assessments for unmeasured confounding.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy AR
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Mar; 61(3):247-55. PubMed ID: 18226747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy A
    Stat Med; 2007 May; 26(11):2331-47. PubMed ID: 16998821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Interpreting treatment-effect estimates with heterogeneity and choice: simulation model results.
    Brooks JM; Fang G
    Clin Ther; 2009 Apr; 31(4):902-19. PubMed ID: 19446162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bias formulas for external adjustment and sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounders.
    Arah OA; Chiba Y; Greenland S
    Ann Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 18(8):637-46. PubMed ID: 18652982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prior event rate ratio adjustment: numerical studies of a statistical method to address unrecognized confounding in observational studies.
    Yu M; Xie D; Wang X; Weiner MG; Tannen RL
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2012 May; 21 Suppl 2():60-8. PubMed ID: 22552981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bounding the bias of unmeasured factors with confounding and effect-modifying potentials.
    Lee WC
    Stat Med; 2011 Apr; 30(9):1007-17. PubMed ID: 21472760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Bayesian modeling of cost-effectiveness studies with unmeasured confounding: a simulation study.
    Stamey JD; Beavers DP; Faries D; Price KL; Seaman JW
    Pharm Stat; 2014; 13(1):94-100. PubMed ID: 24446072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Hierarchical priors for bias parameters in Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding.
    McCandless LC; Gustafson P; Levy AR; Richardson S
    Stat Med; 2012 Feb; 31(4):383-96. PubMed ID: 22253142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. On model selection and model misspecification in causal inference.
    Vansteelandt S; Bekaert M; Claeskens G
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2012 Feb; 21(1):7-30. PubMed ID: 21075803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Causality and confounding in epidemiology].
    Stang A
    Gesundheitswesen; 2011 Dec; 73(12):884-7. PubMed ID: 22193897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Methods to assess intended effects of drug treatment in observational studies are reviewed.
    Klungel OH; Martens EP; Psaty BM; Grobbee DE; Sullivan SD; Stricker BH; Leufkens HG; de Boer A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Dec; 57(12):1223-31. PubMed ID: 15617947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Risk factors, confounding, and the illusion of statistical control.
    Christenfeld NJ; Sloan RP; Carroll D; Greenland S
    Psychosom Med; 2004; 66(6):868-75. PubMed ID: 15564351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Letter to the editor.
    Rubio FJ; Pérez-Elizalde S
    Biom J; 2009 Aug; 51(4):736-8. PubMed ID: 19655311
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 29.