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 *

481 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19684288)

  • 1. The relative ability of different propensity score methods to balance measured covariates between treated and untreated subjects in observational studies.
    Austin PC
    Med Decis Making; 2009; 29(6):661-77. PubMed ID: 19684288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Goodness-of-fit diagnostics for the propensity score model when estimating treatment effects using covariate adjustment with the propensity score.
    Austin PC
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2008 Dec; 17(12):1202-17. PubMed ID: 18972454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessing balance in measured baseline covariates when using many-to-one matching on the propensity-score.
    Austin PC
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2008 Dec; 17(12):1218-25. PubMed ID: 18972455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The concept of the marginally matched subject in propensity-score matched analyses.
    Austin PC; Lee DS
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2009 Jun; 18(6):469-82. PubMed ID: 19319923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating relative risks.
    Austin PC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Jun; 61(6):537-45. PubMed ID: 18471657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(12):2037-49. PubMed ID: 18038446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal odds ratios.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2007 Jul; 26(16):3078-94. PubMed ID: 17187347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Conditioning on the propensity score can result in biased estimation of common measures of treatment effect: a Monte Carlo study.
    Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Normand SL; Anderson GM
    Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):754-68. PubMed ID: 16783757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of propensity score methods: a case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use.
    Austin PC; Mamdani MM
    Stat Med; 2006 Jun; 25(12):2084-106. PubMed ID: 16220490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.
    Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Anderson GM
    Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):734-53. PubMed ID: 16708349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Advanced statistics: the propensity score--a method for estimating treatment effect in observational research.
    Newgard CD; Hedges JR; Arthur M; Mullins RJ
    Acad Emerg Med; 2004 Sep; 11(9):953-61. PubMed ID: 15347546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies.
    Austin PC; Stuart EA
    Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(28):3661-79. PubMed ID: 26238958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(20):2137-48. PubMed ID: 20108233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Propensity score methods and their application in nephrology research.
    Barnieh L; James MT; Zhang J; Hemmelgarn BR
    J Nephrol; 2011; 24(3):256-62. PubMed ID: 21404223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Propensity score balance measures in pharmacoepidemiology: a simulation study.
    Ali MS; Groenwold RH; Pestman WR; Belitser SV; Roes KC; Hoes AW; de Boer A; Klungel OH
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2014 Aug; 23(8):802-11. PubMed ID: 24478163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Absolute risk reductions and numbers needed to treat can be obtained from adjusted survival models for time-to-event outcomes.
    Austin PC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Jan; 63(1):46-55. PubMed ID: 19595575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Introduction to an individual-based standardization method -- propensity score weighting].
    Li ZW; Liu JM; Ren AG
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2010 Feb; 31(2):223-6. PubMed ID: 21215089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Use of propensity score technique to account for exposure-related covariates: an example and lesson.
    Seeger JD; Kurth T; Walker AM
    Med Care; 2007 Oct; 45(10 Supl 2):S143-8. PubMed ID: 17909373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The use of the propensity score for estimating treatment effects: administrative versus clinical data.
    Austin PC; Mamdani MM; Stukel TA; Anderson GM; Tu JV
    Stat Med; 2005 May; 24(10):1563-78. PubMed ID: 15706581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Performance of disease risk scores, propensity scores, and traditional multivariable outcome regression in the presence of multiple confounders.
    Arbogast PG; Ray WA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2011 Sep; 174(5):613-20. PubMed ID: 21749976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 25.