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 *

181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21747286)

  • 21. A structural approach to address the healthy-worker survivor effect in occupational cohorts: an application in the trucking industry cohort.
    Neophytou AM; Picciotto S; Hart JE; Garshick E; Eisen EA; Laden F
    Occup Environ Med; 2014 Jun; 71(6):442-7. PubMed ID: 24727736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Misspecification of confounder-exposure and confounder-outcome associations leads to bias in effect estimates.
    Schuster NA; Rijnhart JJM; Bosman LC; Twisk JWR; Klausch T; Heymans MW
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Jan; 23(1):11. PubMed ID: 36635655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Time-modified confounding.
    Platt RW; Schisterman EF; Cole SR
    Am J Epidemiol; 2009 Sep; 170(6):687-94. PubMed ID: 19675141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Assessment of the healthy worker survivor effect in cancer studies of the United Autoworkers-General Motors cohort.
    Garcia E; Picciotto S; Costello S; Bradshaw PT; Eisen EA
    Occup Environ Med; 2017 Mar; 74(4):294-300. PubMed ID: 28069969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Fitting Marginal Structural and G-Estimation Models Under Complex Treatment Patterns: Investigating the Association Between De Novo Vitamin D Supplement Use After Breast Cancer Diagnosis and All-Cause Mortality Using Linked Pharmacy Claim and Registry Data.
    Madden JM; Leacy FP; Zgaga L; Bennett K
    Am J Epidemiol; 2020 Mar; 189(3):224-234. PubMed ID: 31673702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A comparison between standard methods and structural nested modelling when bias from a healthy worker survivor effect is suspected: an iron-ore mining cohort study.
    Björ O; Damber L; Jonsson H; Nilsson T
    Occup Environ Med; 2015 Jul; 72(7):536-42. PubMed ID: 25713154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Confounding and regression adjustment in difference-in-differences studies.
    Zeldow B; Hatfield LA
    Health Serv Res; 2021 Oct; 56(5):932-941. PubMed ID: 33978956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Analysis approaches to address treatment nonadherence in pragmatic trials with point-treatment settings: a simulation study.
    Hossain MB; Mosquera L; Karim ME
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Feb; 22(1):46. PubMed ID: 35172746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evolving methods for inference in the presence of healthy worker survivor bias.
    Buckley JP; Keil AP; McGrath LJ; Edwards JK
    Epidemiology; 2015 Mar; 26(2):204-12. PubMed ID: 25536456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Occupational exposures and lung cancer: adjustment for unmeasured confounding by smoking.
    Richardson DB
    Epidemiology; 2010 Mar; 21(2):181-6. PubMed ID: 20081541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Controlling Time-Dependent Confounding by Health Status and Frailty: Restriction Versus Statistical Adjustment.
    McGrath LJ; Ellis AR; Brookhart MA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Jul; 182(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 25868551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Incident Ischemic Heart Disease After Long-Term Occupational Exposure to Fine Particulate Matter: Accounting for 2 Forms of Survivor Bias.
    Costello S; Neophytou AM; Brown DM; Noth EM; Hammond SK; Cullen MR; Eisen EA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2016 May; 183(9):861-8. PubMed ID: 27033425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Controlling for confounding via propensity score methods can result in biased estimation of the conditional AUC: A simulation study.
    Galadima HI; McClish DK
    Pharm Stat; 2019 Oct; 18(5):568-582. PubMed ID: 31111682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis and Bayesian analysis of smoking as an unmeasured confounder in a study of silica and lung cancer.
    Steenland K; Greenland S
    Am J Epidemiol; 2004 Aug; 160(4):384-92. PubMed ID: 15286024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Adjustment for time-dependent unmeasured confounders in marginal structural Cox models using validation sample data.
    Burne RM; Abrahamowicz M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Feb; 28(2):357-371. PubMed ID: 28835193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A simulation-based evaluation of methods to estimate the impact of an adverse event on hospital length of stay.
    Samore MH; Shen S; Greene T; Stoddard G; Sauer B; Shinogle J; Nebeker J; Harbarth S
    Med Care; 2007 Oct; 45(10 Supl 2):S108-15. PubMed ID: 17909368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Healthy worker effect and cumulative exposure.
    Steenland K; Deddens J; Salvan A; Stayner L
    Epidemiology; 1995 May; 6(3):339-41. PubMed ID: 7619952
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Bias Reduction through Analysis of Competing Events (BRACE) Correction to Address Cancer Treatment Selection Bias in Observational Data.
    Williamson CW; Nelson TJ; Thompson CA; Vitzthum LK; Zakeri K; Riviere PJ; Bryant AK; Sharabi AB; Zou J; Mell LK
    Clin Cancer Res; 2022 May; 28(9):1832-1840. PubMed ID: 35140122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A weighted Cox model for modelling time-dependent exposures in the analysis of case-control studies.
    Leffondre K; Wynant W; Cao Z; Abrahamowicz M; Heinze G; Siemiatycki J
    Stat Med; 2010 Mar; 29(7-8):839-50. PubMed ID: 20213717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.
    Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Anderson GM
    Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):734-53. PubMed ID: 16708349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.