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 *

223 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21039395)

  • 21. Varying coefficient meta-analytic methods for alpha reliability.
    Bonett DG
    Psychol Methods; 2010 Dec; 15(4):368-85. PubMed ID: 20853952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. How to read and understand and use systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
    Leucht S; Kissling W; Davis JM
    Acta Psychiatr Scand; 2009 Jun; 119(6):443-50. PubMed ID: 19469725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Using clinical trial registries to inform Copas selection model for publication bias in meta-analysis.
    Huang A; Komukai S; Friede T; Hattori S
    Res Synth Methods; 2021 Sep; 12(5):658-673. PubMed ID: 34169657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Sublingual immunotherapy for allergic respiratory diseases: an evaluation of meta-analyses.
    Nieto A; Mazon A; Pamies R; Bruno L; Navarro M; Montanes A
    J Allergy Clin Immunol; 2009 Jul; 124(1):157-161.e1-32. PubMed ID: 19500824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A robust P-value for treatment effect in meta-analysis with publication bias.
    Copas JB; Malley PF
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(21):4267-78. PubMed ID: 18384185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Using journal impact factors to correct for the publication bias of medical studies.
    Baker R; Jackson D
    Biometrics; 2006 Sep; 62(3):785-92. PubMed ID: 16984321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Sensitivity analyses allowed more appropriate and reliable meta-analysis conclusions for multiple outcomes when missing data was present.
    Riley RD; Sutton AJ; Abrams KR; Lambert PC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Sep; 57(9):911-24. PubMed ID: 15504634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.
    Guyatt GH; Oxman AD; Montori V; Vist G; Kunz R; Brozek J; Alonso-Coello P; Djulbegovic B; Atkins D; Falck-Ytter Y; Williams JW; Meerpohl J; Norris SL; Akl EA; Schünemann HJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Dec; 64(12):1277-82. PubMed ID: 21802904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The conditional relative odds ratio provided less biased results for comparing diagnostic test accuracy in meta-analyses.
    Suzuki S; Moro-oka T; Choudhry NK
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 May; 57(5):461-9. PubMed ID: 15196616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis.
    Macaskill P; Walter SD; Irwig L
    Stat Med; 2001 Feb; 20(4):641-54. PubMed ID: 11223905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Detecting and correcting for publication bias in meta-analysis - A truncated normal distribution approach.
    Zhu Q; Carriere KC
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Sep; 27(9):2722-2741. PubMed ID: 28024447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Accounting for publication bias using a bivariate trim and fill meta-analysis procedure.
    Luo C; Marks-Anglin A; Duan R; Lin L; Hong C; Chu H; Chen Y
    Stat Med; 2022 Aug; 41(18):3466-3478. PubMed ID: 35574857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. How effective is St John's wort? The evidence revisited.
    Werneke U; Horn O; Taylor DM
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2004 May; 65(5):611-7. PubMed ID: 15163246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Interpretation of tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analysis.
    Ioannidis JP
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):951-7. PubMed ID: 19018930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Meta-analysis for evidence synthesis in plant pathology: an overview.
    Madden LV; Paul PA
    Phytopathology; 2011 Jan; 101(1):16-30. PubMed ID: 21142781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Imputing variance estimates do not alter the conclusions of a meta-analysis with continuous outcomes: a case study of changes in renal function after living kidney donation.
    Thiessen Philbrook H; Barrowman N; Garg AX
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Mar; 60(3):228-40. PubMed ID: 17292016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of underlying risk as a source of heterogeneity in meta-analyses: a simulation study of Bayesian and frequentist implementations of three models.
    Dohoo I; Stryhn H; Sanchez J
    Prev Vet Med; 2007 Sep; 81(1-3):38-55. PubMed ID: 17477995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Publication bias & small-study effects in pediatric dentistry meta-analyses.
    Papageorgiou SN; Dimitraki D; Coolidge T; Kotsanos N
    J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2015 Mar; 15(1):8-24. PubMed ID: 25666576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Meta-analysis, funnel plots and sensitivity analysis.
    Copas J; Shi JQ
    Biostatistics; 2000 Sep; 1(3):247-62. PubMed ID: 12933507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Graphical methods for detecting bias in meta-analysis.
    Ferrer RL
    Fam Med; 1998 Sep; 30(8):579-83. PubMed ID: 9773289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.