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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20046952)

  • 1. Correcting Instrumental Variables Estimators for Systematic Measurement Error.
    Vansteelandt S; Babanezhad M; Goetghebeur E
    Stat Sin; 2009 Jan; 19():1223-1246. PubMed ID: 20046952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sensitivity analysis of G-estimators to invalid instrumental variables.
    Vancak V; Sjölander A
    Stat Med; 2023 Oct; 42(23):4257-4281. PubMed ID: 37497859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The impact of unmeasured within- and between-cluster confounding on the bias of effect estimatorsof a continuous exposure.
    Li Y; Lee Y; Port FK; Robinson BM
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Aug; 29(8):2119-2139. PubMed ID: 31694489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Efficiency and robustness of causal effect estimators when noncompliance is measured with error.
    Boatman JA; Vock DM; Koopmeiners JS
    Stat Med; 2018 Dec; 37(28):4126-4141. PubMed ID: 30109713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Correcting for Measurement Error in Time-Varying Covariates in Marginal Structural Models.
    Kyle RP; Moodie EE; Klein MB; Abrahamowicz M
    Am J Epidemiol; 2016 Aug; 184(3):249-58. PubMed ID: 27416840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies.
    Hogan JW; Lancaster T
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2004 Feb; 13(1):17-48. PubMed ID: 14746439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Causal Proportional Hazards Estimation with a Binary Instrumental Variable.
    Kianian B; Kim JI; Fine JP; Peng L
    Stat Sin; 2021 Apr; 31(2):673-699. PubMed ID: 34970068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Instrumental variables vs. grouping approach for reducing bias due to measurement error.
    Batistatou E; McNamee R
    Int J Biostat; 2008; 4(1):Article 8. PubMed ID: 22462115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Model-based bootstrapping when correcting for measurement error with application to logistic regression.
    Buonaccorsi JP; Romeo G; Thoresen M
    Biometrics; 2018 Mar; 74(1):135-144. PubMed ID: 28556914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Combining Multiple Observational Data Sources to Estimate Causal Effects.
    Yang S; Ding P
    J Am Stat Assoc; 2020; 115(531):1540-1554. PubMed ID: 33088006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Illustration of 2 Fusion Designs and Estimators.
    Cole SR; Edwards JK; Breskin A; Rosin S; Zivich PN; Shook-Sa BE; Hudgens MG
    Am J Epidemiol; 2023 Feb; 192(3):467-474. PubMed ID: 35388406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bounded, efficient and multiply robust estimation of average treatment effects using instrumental variables.
    Wang L; Tchetgen Tchetgen E
    J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol; 2018 Jun; 80(3):531-550. PubMed ID: 30034269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Proportional Hazards Model with Covariate Measurement Error and Instrumental Variables.
    Song X; Wang CY
    J Am Stat Assoc; 2014 Dec; 109(504):1636-1646. PubMed ID: 25663724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bias testing, bias correction, and confounder selection using an instrumental variable model.
    Yeob Choi B; Fine JP; Alan Brookhart M
    Stat Med; 2020 Dec; 39(29):4386-4404. PubMed ID: 32854161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Correcting the Standard Errors of 2-Stage Residual Inclusion Estimators for Mendelian Randomization Studies.
    Palmer TM; Holmes MV; Keating BJ; Sheehan NA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2017 Nov; 186(9):1104-1114. PubMed ID: 29106476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Measurement error in a random walk model with applications to population dynamics.
    Staudenmayer J; Buonaccorsi JP
    Biometrics; 2006 Dec; 62(4):1178-89. PubMed ID: 17156293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparing measurement error correction methods for rate-of-change exposure variables in survival analysis.
    Veronesi G; Ferrario MM; Chambless LE
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2013 Dec; 22(6):583-97. PubMed ID: 21300627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Nonparametric binary instrumental variable analysis of competing risks data.
    Richardson A; Hudgens MG; Fine JP; Brookhart MA
    Biostatistics; 2017 Jan; 18(1):48-61. PubMed ID: 27354709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Robust best linear estimator for Cox regression with instrumental variables in whole cohort and surrogates with additive measurement error in calibration sample.
    Wang CY; Song X
    Biom J; 2016 Nov; 58(6):1465-1484. PubMed ID: 27546625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Some cautions on the use of instrumental variables estimators in outcomes research: how bias in instrumental variables estimators is affected by instrument strength, instrument contamination, and sample size.
    Crown WH; Henk HJ; Vanness DJ
    Value Health; 2011 Dec; 14(8):1078-84. PubMed ID: 22152177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.