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 *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21394888)

  • 1. A note on dealing with missing standard errors in meta-analyses of continuous outcome measures in WinBUGS.
    Stevens JW
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(4):374-8. PubMed ID: 21394888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accounting for uncertainty due to 'last observation carried forward' outcome imputation in a meta-analysis model.
    Dimitrakopoulou V; Efthimiou O; Leucht S; Salanti G
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(5):742-52. PubMed ID: 25492741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Multiple imputation of missing at random data: General points and presentation of a Monte-Carlo method].
    Cottrell G; Cot M; Mary JY
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2009 Oct; 57(5):361-72. PubMed ID: 19674855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS.
    Lambert PC; Sutton AJ; Burton PR; Abrams KR; Jones DR
    Stat Med; 2005 Aug; 24(15):2401-28. PubMed ID: 16015676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dealing with missing data in a multi-question depression scale: a comparison of imputation methods.
    Shrive FM; Stuart H; Quan H; Ghali WA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Dec; 6():57. PubMed ID: 17166270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dealing with missing outcome data in randomized trials and observational studies.
    Groenwold RH; Donders AR; Roes KC; Harrell FE; Moons KG
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Feb; 175(3):210-7. PubMed ID: 22262640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ecological-type inference in matched-pair studies with fixed marginal totals.
    Barker LK; Griffin SO; Jeon S; Gray SK; Vidakovic B
    Stat Med; 2011 Feb; 30(5):541-8. PubMed ID: 21312218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Analysis of longitudinal trials with protocol deviation: a framework for relevant, accessible assumptions, and inference via multiple imputation.
    Carpenter JR; Roger JH; Kenward MG
    J Biopharm Stat; 2013; 23(6):1352-71. PubMed ID: 24138436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Allowing for uncertainty due to missing data in meta-analysis--part 2: hierarchical models.
    White IR; Welton NJ; Wood AM; Ades AE; Higgins JP
    Stat Med; 2008 Feb; 27(5):728-45. PubMed ID: 17703502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Bayesian analysis for generalized linear models with nonignorably missing covariates.
    Huang L; Chen MH; Ibrahim JG
    Biometrics; 2005 Sep; 61(3):767-80. PubMed ID: 16135028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Imputation of missing variance data using non-linear mixed effects modelling to enable an inverse variance weighted meta-analysis of summary-level longitudinal data: a case study.
    Boucher M
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(4):318-24. PubMed ID: 22566382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Missing phenotype data imputation in pedigree data analysis.
    Fridley BL; de Andrade M
    Genet Epidemiol; 2008 Jan; 32(1):52-60. PubMed ID: 17685457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluating the impact of imputations for missing participant outcome data in a network meta-analysis.
    Spineli LM; Higgins JP; Cipriani A; Leucht S; Salanti G
    Clin Trials; 2013; 10(3):378-88. PubMed ID: 23321265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. GSEVM v.2: MCMC software to analyze genetically structured environmental variance models.
    Ibáñez-Escriche N; Garcia M; Sorensen D
    J Anim Breed Genet; 2010 Jun; 127(3):249-51. PubMed ID: 20536643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Multiple imputation for model checking: completed-data plots with missing and latent data.
    Gelman A; Van Mechelen I; Verbeke G; Heitjan DF; Meulders M
    Biometrics; 2005 Mar; 61(1):74-85. PubMed ID: 15737080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ratio of means for analyzing continuous outcomes in meta-analysis performed as well as mean difference methods.
    Friedrich JO; Adhikari NK; Beyene J
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 May; 64(5):556-64. PubMed ID: 21447428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Use of re-randomized data in meta-analysis.
    Hozo I; Djulbegovic B; Clark O; Lyman GH
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2005 May; 5():17. PubMed ID: 15882470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bias and Precision of the "Multiple Imputation, Then Deletion" Method for Dealing With Missing Outcome Data.
    Sullivan TR; Salter AB; Ryan P; Lee KJ
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Sep; 182(6):528-34. PubMed ID: 26337075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Imputing intracluster correlation coefficients from a posterior predictive distribution is a feasible method of dealing with unit of analysis errors in a meta-analysis of cluster RCTs.
    Konnyu KJ; Taljaard M; Ivers NM; Moher D; Grimshaw JM
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Nov; 139():307-318. PubMed ID: 34171503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.