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 *

443 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21948059)

  • 1. Beyond the intention-to-treat in comparative effectiveness research.
    Hernán MA; Hernández-Díaz S
    Clin Trials; 2012 Feb; 9(1):48-55. PubMed ID: 21948059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Adjusting for adherence in randomized trials when adherence is measured as a continuous variable: An application to the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial.
    Wanis KN; Madenci AL; Hernán MA; Murray EJ
    Clin Trials; 2020 Oct; 17(5):570-575. PubMed ID: 32414298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Interval-cohort designs and bias in the estimation of per-protocol effects: a simulation study.
    Young JG; Vatsa R; Murray EJ; Hernán MA
    Trials; 2019 Sep; 20(1):552. PubMed ID: 31488202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Beyond intention to treat: what is the right question?
    Shrier I; Steele RJ; Verhagen E; Herbert R; Riddell CA; Kaufman JS
    Clin Trials; 2014 Feb; 11(1):28-37. PubMed ID: 24096636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Adherence adjustment in the Coronary Drug Project: A call for better per-protocol effect estimates in randomized trials.
    Murray EJ; Hernán MA
    Clin Trials; 2016 Aug; 13(4):372-8. PubMed ID: 26951361
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Randomised controlled trials and clinical maternity care: moving on from intention-to-treat and other simplistic analyses of efficacy.
    Welsh AW
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2013 Jan; 13():15. PubMed ID: 23324442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Intention to treat, per protocol, as treated and instrumental variable estimators given non-compliance and effect heterogeneity.
    McNamee R
    Stat Med; 2009 Sep; 28(21):2639-52. PubMed ID: 19579227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessing efficacy in non-inferiority trials with non-adherence to interventions: Are intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses fit for purpose?
    Dodd M; Carpenter J; Thompson JA; Williamson E; Fielding K; Elbourne D
    Stat Med; 2024 May; 43(12):2314-2331. PubMed ID: 38561927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Per-Protocol analyses produced larger treatment effect sizes than intention to treat: a meta-epidemiological study.
    Mostazir M; Taylor G; Henley WE; Watkins ER; Taylor RS
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2021 Oct; 138():12-21. PubMed ID: 34161805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Unresolved issues with noninferiority pragmatic trials: Results of a literature survey.
    Ciarleglio MM; Li J; Peduzzi P
    Clin Trials; 2024 Apr; 21(2):242-256. PubMed ID: 37927102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An IV for the RCT: using instrumental variables to adjust for treatment contamination in randomised controlled trials.
    Sussman JB; Hayward RA
    BMJ; 2010 May; 340():c2073. PubMed ID: 20442226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Intention to treat and per protocol analyses: differences and similarities.
    Molero-Calafell J; Burón A; Castells X; Porta M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2024 Sep; 173():111457. PubMed ID: 38977160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Simple Estimation of Patient-Oriented Effects From Randomized Trials: An Open and Shut CACE.
    Steele RJ; Shrier I; Kaufman JS; Platt RW
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Sep; 182(6):557-66. PubMed ID: 26283090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Understanding the Intention-to-treat Principle in Randomized Controlled Trials.
    McCoy CE
    West J Emerg Med; 2017 Oct; 18(6):1075-1078. PubMed ID: 29085540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Patients and investigators prefer measures of absolute risk in subgroups for pragmatic randomized trials.
    Murray EJ; Caniglia EC; Swanson SA; Hernández-Díaz S; Hernán MA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Nov; 103():10-21. PubMed ID: 29966732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Intention-to-treat analyses in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials.
    Pagoto SL; Kozak AT; John P; Bodenlos JS; Hedeker D; Spring B; Schneider KL
    Int J Behav Med; 2009; 16(4):316-22. PubMed ID: 19319693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Methodological Challenges and Statistical Approaches in the COMprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services Study.
    Psioda MA; Jones SB; Xenakis JG; D'Agostino RB
    Med Care; 2021 Aug; 59(Suppl 4):S355-S363. PubMed ID: 34228017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A systematic review found that deviations from intention-to-treat are common in randomized trials and systematic reviews.
    Abraha I; Cozzolino F; Orso M; Marchesi M; Germani A; Lombardo G; Eusebi P; De Florio R; Luchetta ML; Iorio A; Montedori A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Apr; 84():37-46. PubMed ID: 28088592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Protocol adherence rates in superiority and noninferiority randomized clinical trials published in high impact medical journals.
    Bamat NA; Ekhaguere OA; Zhang L; Flannery DD; Handley SC; Herrick HM; Ellenberg SS
    Clin Trials; 2020 Oct; 17(5):552-559. PubMed ID: 32666826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.