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 *

220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22213533)

  • 1. Statistical approaches for conducting network meta-analysis in drug development.
    Jones B; Roger J; Lane PW; Lawton A; Fletcher C; Cappelleri JC; Tate H; Moneuse P;
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(6):523-31. PubMed ID: 22213533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2.
    Hoaglin DC; Hawkins N; Jansen JP; Scott DA; Itzler R; Cappelleri JC; Boersma C; Thompson D; Larholt KM; Diaz M; Barrett A
    Value Health; 2011 Jun; 14(4):429-37. PubMed ID: 21669367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Meta-analysis of continuous outcome data from individual patients.
    Higgins JP; Whitehead A; Turner RM; Omar RZ; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2001 Aug; 20(15):2219-41. PubMed ID: 11468761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A Bayesian approach to meta-analysis of plant pathology studies.
    Mila AL; Ngugi HK
    Phytopathology; 2011 Jan; 101(1):42-51. PubMed ID: 20822433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. [Meta-analysis of the Italian studies on short-term effects of air pollution].
    Biggeri A; Bellini P; Terracini B;
    Epidemiol Prev; 2001; 25(2 Suppl):1-71. PubMed ID: 11515188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Meta-analysis of summary survival curve data.
    Arends LR; Hunink MG; Stijnen T
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(22):4381-96. PubMed ID: 18465839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis model for medical device evaluation: application to intracranial stents.
    Pibouleau L; Chevret S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Apr; 29(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 23601495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Meta-analysis of individual patient data versus aggregate data from longitudinal clinical trials.
    Jones AP; Riley RD; Williamson PR; Whitehead A
    Clin Trials; 2009 Feb; 6(1):16-27. PubMed ID: 19254930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Bayesian adaptive clinical trials: a dream for statisticians only?
    Chevret S
    Stat Med; 2012 May; 31(11-12):1002-13. PubMed ID: 21905067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of meta-analytic results of indirect, direct, and combined comparisons of drugs for chronic insomnia in adults: a case study.
    Vandermeer BW; Buscemi N; Liang Y; Witmans M
    Med Care; 2007 Oct; 45(10 Supl 2):S166-72. PubMed ID: 17909377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Random effects meta-analysis of event outcome in the framework of the generalized linear mixed model with applications in sparse data.
    Stijnen T; Hamza TH; Ozdemir P
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(29):3046-67. PubMed ID: 20827667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Empirical Bayes estimates generated in a hierarchical summary ROC analysis agreed closely with those of a full Bayesian analysis.
    Macaskill P
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Sep; 57(9):925-32. PubMed ID: 15504635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Random effects survival models gave a better understanding of heterogeneity in individual patient data meta-analyses.
    Michiels S; Baujat B; Mahé C; Sargent DJ; Pignon JP
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Mar; 58(3):238-45. PubMed ID: 15718112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Confidence intervals for the amount of heterogeneity in meta-analysis.
    Viechtbauer W
    Stat Med; 2007 Jan; 26(1):37-52. PubMed ID: 16463355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Incorporating data from various trial designs into a mixed treatment comparison model.
    Schmitz S; Adams R; Walsh C
    Stat Med; 2013 Jul; 32(17):2935-49. PubMed ID: 23440610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Accounting for variability in individual hierarchical clinical trial data.
    Tibaldi F; Renard D; Molenberghs G
    Pharm Stat; 2008; 7(4):285-93. PubMed ID: 17948233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Subgroup analyses of clinical effectiveness to support health technology assessments.
    Paget MA; Chuang-Stein C; Fletcher C; Reid C
    Pharm Stat; 2011; 10(6):532-8. PubMed ID: 22140066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Classic or Bayesian research design and analysis. Does it make a difference?
    Bloom BS; de Pouvourville N; Libert S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2002; 18(1):120-6. PubMed ID: 11987435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Meta-regression with partial information on summary trial or patient characteristics.
    Hemming K; Hutton JL; Maguire MG; Marson AG
    Stat Med; 2010 May; 29(12):1312-24. PubMed ID: 20087842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.