109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20608262)
1. [Meta-analysis based on individual patient data: example of advanced colorectal cancer].
Piedbois P; Buyse M
Rech Soins Infirm; 2010 Jun; (101):25-8. PubMed ID: 20608262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Individual patient-level and study-level meta-analysis for investigating modifiers of treatment effect.
Teramukai S; Matsuyama Y; Mizuno S; Sakamoto J
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2004 Dec; 34(12):717-21. PubMed ID: 15640501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Use of meta-analysis for the validation of surrogate endpoints and biomarkers in cancer trials.
Buyse M
Cancer J; 2009; 15(5):421-5. PubMed ID: 19826362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Empirical comparison of subgroup effects in conventional and individual patient data meta-analyses.
Koopman L; van der Heijden GJ; Hoes AW; Grobbee DE; Rovers MM
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2008; 24(3):358-61. PubMed ID: 18601805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Meta-analysis of individual patient data versus aggregate data from longitudinal clinical trials.
Jones AP; Riley RD; Williamson PR; Whitehead A
Clin Trials; 2009 Feb; 6(1):16-27. PubMed ID: 19254930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The relative benefits of meta-analysis conducted with individual participant data versus aggregated data.
Cooper H; Patall EA
Psychol Methods; 2009 Jun; 14(2):165-76. PubMed ID: 19485627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Contribution of meta-analyses to the evaluation of treatments for advanced colorectal cancer.
Zelek L; Piedbois P; Buyse M
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther; 2002 Aug; 2(4):417-25. PubMed ID: 12647985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis.
Tierney JF; Stewart LA
Int J Epidemiol; 2005 Feb; 34(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 15561753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of methods of handling missing data in individual patient data meta-analyses: an empirical example on antibiotics in children with acute otitis media.
Koopman L; van der Heijden GJ; Grobbee DE; Rovers MM
Am J Epidemiol; 2008 Mar; 167(5):540-5. PubMed ID: 18184640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in advanced colorectal cancer: a clinician's perspective.
Piedbois P; Miller Croswell J
Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Oct; 17(5):519-27. PubMed ID: 18285441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An overview of methods and empirical comparison of aggregate data and individual patient data results for investigating heterogeneity in meta-analysis of time-to-event outcomes.
Smith CT; Williamson PR; Marson AG
J Eval Clin Pract; 2005 Oct; 11(5):468-78. PubMed ID: 16164588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A new and rapid scoring system to assess the scientific evidence from clinical trials.
Silber S
J Interv Cardiol; 2006 Dec; 19(6):485-92. PubMed ID: 17107362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Meta-analysis as a tool for evidence-based practice: an example using the Rice meta-analysis of smoking cessation interventions.
Leonard EE; Wynd CA
Appl Nurs Res; 2008 Feb; 21(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 18226762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Meta-analysis of continuous outcomes combining individual patient data and aggregate data.
Riley RD; Lambert PC; Staessen JA; Wang J; Gueyffier F; Thijs L; Boutitie F
Stat Med; 2008 May; 27(11):1870-93. PubMed ID: 18069721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The meta-analytic approach to research integration.
Onyskiw JE
Can J Nurs Res; 1996; 28(3):69-85. PubMed ID: 8997940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A simple meta-analytic approach for using a binary surrogate endpoint to predict the effect of intervention on true endpoint.
Baker SG
Biostatistics; 2006 Jan; 7(1):58-70. PubMed ID: 15972889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The meta-analysis on summary data].
Maison P
Rech Soins Infirm; 2010 Jun; (101):18-24. PubMed ID: 20608261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Two simple approaches for validating a binary surrogate endpoint using data from multiple trials.
Baker SG
Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Oct; 17(5):505-14. PubMed ID: 18285436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Meta-analyses of randomized trials in oncology: pros and cons].
Hill C; Pignon JP
Bull Cancer; 1999 Mar; 86(3):259-64. PubMed ID: 10210759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Potential and pitfalls of randomized clinical trials in cancer research.
Buyse ME
Cancer Surv; 1989; 8(1):91-105. PubMed ID: 2804990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
