181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20831303)
1. There's a reason they call them dummy variables: a note on the use of structural equation techniques in comparative effectiveness research.
Crown WH
Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(10):947-55. PubMed ID: 20831303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. It is important to note that RWD will never replace the more traditional and more robust RCT data; however, the emerging trend is to incorporate data that are more generalizable. Introduction.
Mullins CD; Sanchez RJ
J Manag Care Pharm; 2011; 17(9 Suppl A):S03-4. PubMed ID: 22074667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives.
Brookes ST; Whitley E; Peters TJ; Mulheran PA; Egger M; Davey Smith G
Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(33):1-56. PubMed ID: 11701102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Methods in comparative effectiveness research.
Armstrong K
J Clin Oncol; 2012 Dec; 30(34):4208-14. PubMed ID: 23071240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The productivity of mental health care: an instrumental variable approach.
Lu M
J Ment Health Policy Econ; 1999 Jun; 2(2):59-71. PubMed ID: 11967410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluating methodological assumptions in comparative effectiveness research: overcoming pitfalls.
Alemayehu D; Cappelleri JC
J Comp Eff Res; 2014 Jan; 3(1):79-93. PubMed ID: 24345258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Point-of-Care Clinical Trials in Sports Medicine Research: Identifying Effective Treatment Interventions Through Comparative Effectiveness Research.
Lam KC; Bacon CEW; Sauers EL; Bay RC
J Athl Train; 2020 Mar; 55(3):217-228. PubMed ID: 31618071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Overview of the epidemiology methods and applications: strengths and limitations of observational study designs.
Colditz GA
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr; 2010; 50 Suppl 1(s1):10-2. PubMed ID: 21132580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A review of covariate selection for non-experimental comparative effectiveness research.
Sauer BC; Brookhart MA; Roy J; VanderWeele T
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2013 Nov; 22(11):1139-45. PubMed ID: 24006330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Ethical pitfalls in neonatal comparative effectiveness trials.
Modi N
Neonatology; 2014; 105(4):350-1. PubMed ID: 24931328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The methods of comparative effectiveness research.
Sox HC; Goodman SN
Annu Rev Public Health; 2012 Apr; 33():425-45. PubMed ID: 22224891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Recent controversies on comparative effectiveness research investigations: Challenges, opportunities, and pitfalls.
Kirpalani H; Truog WE; D'Angio CT; Cotten M
Semin Perinatol; 2016 Oct; 40(6):341-347. PubMed ID: 27423511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sample size importantly limits the usefulness of instrumental variable methods, depending on instrument strength and level of confounding.
Boef AG; Dekkers OM; Vandenbroucke JP; le Cessie S
J Clin Epidemiol; 2014 Nov; 67(11):1258-64. PubMed ID: 25124167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A call for action: Comparative effectiveness research in asthma.
Krishnan JA; Schatz M; Apter AJ
J Allergy Clin Immunol; 2011 Jan; 127(1):123-7. PubMed ID: 20855111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessing causal treatment effect estimation when using large observational datasets.
John ER; Abrams KR; Brightling CE; Sheehan NA
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Nov; 19(1):207. PubMed ID: 31726969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical research on traditional drugs and food items--the potential of comparative effectiveness research for interdisciplinary research.
Witt CM
J Ethnopharmacol; 2013 May; 147(1):254-8. PubMed ID: 23458921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment.
Philips Z; Ginnelly L; Sculpher M; Claxton K; Golder S; Riemsma R; Woolacoot N; Glanville J
Health Technol Assess; 2004 Sep; 8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. PubMed ID: 15361314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
