138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20494223)
1. When less is more: using shrinkage to increase accuracy.
Wears RL; Normand SL
Ann Emerg Med; 2010 Jun; 55(6):553-5. PubMed ID: 20494223
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Studying the prevention of acute kidney injury: lessons from an 18th-century mathematician.
Chertow GM; Palevsky PM; Greene T
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol; 2006 Sep; 1(5):1124-7. PubMed ID: 17699335
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Sample size reestimation by Bayesian prediction.
Wang MD
Biom J; 2007 Jun; 49(3):365-77. PubMed ID: 17623342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mixtures of prior distributions for predictive Bayesian sample size calculations in clinical trials.
Brutti P; De Santis F; Gubbiotti S
Stat Med; 2009 Jul; 28(17):2185-201. PubMed ID: 19462415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sample size and the probability of a successful trial.
Chuang-Stein C
Pharm Stat; 2006; 5(4):305-9. PubMed ID: 17128428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Statistics and the relationship of clinical research to clinical practice.
Khuder SA; Kahaleh B
J Rheumatol; 2009 Feb; 36(2):219-20. PubMed ID: 19208555
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Sample size calculation for the van Elteren test adjusting for ties.
Zhao YD; Rahardja D; Mei Y
J Biopharm Stat; 2008; 18(6):1112-9. PubMed ID: 18991111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Estimates, power and sample size calculations for two-sample ordinal outcomes under before-after study designs.
Strickland PA; Lu SE
Stat Med; 2003 Jun; 22(11):1807-18. PubMed ID: 12754716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Bayesian sample size calculations for a non-inferiority test of two proportions in clinical trials.
Daimon T
Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Jul; 29(4):507-16. PubMed ID: 18201944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Literature review: January-March 2008.
Patterson SD; Carroll K
Pharm Stat; 2008; 7(2):147-9. PubMed ID: 18428118
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Sample size allocation to regions in a multiregional trial.
Uesaka H
J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Jul; 19(4):580-94. PubMed ID: 20183427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A nonparametric two-sample comparison for skewed data with unequal variances.
Skovlund E
J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Jun; 63(6):594-5. PubMed ID: 20056384
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. [Analysis and importance of statistical power and sample size in empirical scientific research].
Klimek KM
Wiad Lek; 2008; 61(7-9):211-5. PubMed ID: 19172834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Optimal sample size for a series of pilot trials of new agents.
Yao TJ; Begg CB; Livingston PO
Biometrics; 1996 Sep; 52(3):992-1001. PubMed ID: 8805764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The choice of sample size: a mixed Bayesian / frequentist approach.
Pezeshk H; Nematollahi N; Maroufy V; Gittins J
Stat Methods Med Res; 2009 Apr; 18(2):183-94. PubMed ID: 18445695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Empirical shrinkage estimator for consistency assessment of treatment effects in multi-regional clinical trials.
Quan H; Li M; Shih WJ; Ouyang SP; Chen J; Zhang J; Zhao PL
Stat Med; 2013 May; 32(10):1691-706. PubMed ID: 22855311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of the statistical power for multiple tests: a case study.
Yeo A; Qu Y
Pharm Stat; 2009; 8(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 18381588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A behavioral Bayes method to determine the sample size of a clinical trial considering efficacy and safety.
Kikuchi T; Gittins J
Stat Med; 2009 Aug; 28(18):2293-306. PubMed ID: 19536745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Continuous toxicity monitoring in phase II trials in oncology.
Ivanova A; Qaqish BF; Schell MJ
Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):540-5. PubMed ID: 16011702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Identifying and assessing the null hypothesis.
Luft HS
Health Serv Res; 2000 Feb; 34(6):1265-71. PubMed ID: 10654829
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
