143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21796723)
1. Surrogates, meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness modelling: a combined analytic approach.
Hawkins N; Richardson G; Sutton AJ; Cooper NJ; Griffiths C; Rogers A; Bower P
Health Econ; 2012 Jun; 21(6):742-56. PubMed ID: 21796723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: a review and case studies.
Sculpher MJ; Pang FS; Manca A; Drummond MF; Golder S; Urdahl H; Davies LM; Eastwood A
Health Technol Assess; 2004 Dec; 8(49):iii-iv, 1-192. PubMed ID: 15544708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Economic endpoints in clinical trials.
Cook J; Drummond M; Heyse JF
Stat Methods Med Res; 2004 Apr; 13(2):157-76. PubMed ID: 15068259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists for postmyocardial infarction heart failure.
McKenna C; Burch J; Suekarran S; Walker S; Bakhai A; Witte K; Harden M; Wright K; Woolacott N; Lorgelly P; Fenwick L; Palmer S
Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(24):1-162. PubMed ID: 20492762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Exploring the relationship between the causal-inference and meta-analytic paradigms for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints.
Van der Elst W; Molenberghs G; Alonso A
Stat Med; 2016 Apr; 35(8):1281-98. PubMed ID: 26612787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and economic modelling of minimal incision total hip replacement approaches in the management of arthritic disease of the hip.
de Verteuil R; Imamura M; Zhu S; Glazener C; Fraser C; Munro N; Hutchison J; Grant A; Coyle D; Coyle K; Vale L
Health Technol Assess; 2008 Jun; 12(26):iii-iv, ix-223. PubMed ID: 18513467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different models of managing long-term oral anticoagulation therapy: a systematic review and economic modelling.
Connock M; Stevens C; Fry-Smith A; Jowett S; Fitzmaurice D; Moore D; Song F
Health Technol Assess; 2007 Oct; 11(38):iii-iv, ix-66. PubMed ID: 17903392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Surrogate endpoints for overall survival in digestive oncology trials: which candidates? A questionnaires survey among clinicians and methodologists.
Methy N; Bedenne L; Bonnetain F
BMC Cancer; 2010 Jun; 10():277. PubMed ID: 20537166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Prentice's approach and the meta-analytic paradigm: a reflection on the role of statistics in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints.
Alonso A; Molenberghs G; Burzykowski T; Renard D; Geys H; Shkedy Z; Tibaldi F; Abrahantes JC; Buyse M
Biometrics; 2004 Sep; 60(3):724-8. PubMed ID: 15339295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Surrogate, friend or foe? The need for case studies of the use of surrogate outcomes in cost-effectiveness analyses.
Ciani O; Taylor RS
Health Econ; 2013 Feb; 22(2):251-2. PubMed ID: 22623328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Mapping clinical outcomes to generic preference-based outcome measures: development and comparison of methods.
Hernández Alava M; Wailoo A; Pudney S; Gray L; Manca A
Health Technol Assess; 2020 Jun; 24(34):1-68. PubMed ID: 32613941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials via principal stratification with an application to a prostate cancer trial.
Tanaka S; Matsuyama Y; Ohashi Y
Stat Med; 2017 Aug; 36(19):2963-2977. PubMed ID: 28485043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Meta-analysis for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials.
Shi Q; Sargent DJ
Int J Clin Oncol; 2009 Apr; 14(2):102-11. PubMed ID: 19390940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A unified framework for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in mental-health clinical trials.
Molenberghs G; Burzykowski T; Alonso A; Assam P; Tilahun A; Buyse M
Stat Methods Med Res; 2010 Jun; 19(3):205-36. PubMed ID: 19608602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An evaluation of the feasibility, cost and value of information of a multicentre randomised controlled trial of intravenous immunoglobulin for sepsis (severe sepsis and septic shock): incorporating a systematic review, meta-analysis and value of information analysis.
Soares MO; Welton NJ; Harrison DA; Peura P; Shankar- Hari M; Harvey SE; Madan JJ; Ades AE; Palmer SJ; Rowan KM
Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(7):1-186. PubMed ID: 22361003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Supported self-management for patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): an evidence synthesis and economic analysis.
Jordan RE; Majothi S; Heneghan NR; Blissett DB; Riley RD; Sitch AJ; Price MJ; Bates EJ; Turner AM; Bayliss S; Moore D; Singh S; Adab P; Fitzmaurice DA; Jowett S; Jolly K
Health Technol Assess; 2015 May; 19(36):1-516. PubMed ID: 25980984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An investigation into the two-stage meta-analytic copula modelling approach for evaluating time-to-event surrogate endpoints which comprise of one or more events of interest.
Dimier N; Todd S
Pharm Stat; 2017 Sep; 16(5):322-333. PubMed ID: 28544622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
