122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22226004)
1. Comparison of the global statistical test and composite outcome for secondary analyses of multiple coronary heart disease outcomes.
Baraniuk S; Seay R; Sinha AK; Piller LB
Prog Cardiovasc Dis; 2012; 54(4):357-61. PubMed ID: 22226004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Easily applicable multiple testing procedures to improve the interpretation of clinical trials with composite endpoints.
Schüler S; Mucha A; Doherty P; Kieser M; Rauch G
Int J Cardiol; 2014 Jul; 175(1):126-32. PubMed ID: 24861257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Controlled randomized clinical trials].
Jaillon P
Bull Acad Natl Med; 2007; 191(4-5):739-56; discussion 756-8. PubMed ID: 18225427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials.
Huque MF; Alosh M; Bhore R
J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):610-34. PubMed ID: 21516560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison of the statistical power of different methods for the analysis of cluster randomization trials with binary outcomes.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2007 Aug; 26(19):3550-65. PubMed ID: 17238238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A likelihood approach to analyzing clinical trial data when treatments favor different outcomes.
McClure LA; Brown MB
Contemp Clin Trials; 2006 Aug; 27(4):340-52. PubMed ID: 16426899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Informed choice of composite end points in cardiovascular trials.
Gómez G; Gómez-Mateu M; Dafni U
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2014 Jan; 7(1):170-8. PubMed ID: 24425702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Acute coronary care in the elderly, part I: Non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a scientific statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of Geriatric Cardiology.
Alexander KP; Newby LK; Cannon CP; Armstrong PW; Gibler WB; Rich MW; Van de Werf F; White HD; Weaver WD; Naylor MD; Gore JM; Krumholz HM; Ohman EM; ;
Circulation; 2007 May; 115(19):2549-69. PubMed ID: 17502590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Test homogeneity of odds ratio in a randomized clinical trial with noncompliance.
Lui KJ; Chang KC
J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Sep; 19(5):916-32. PubMed ID: 20183452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluating health outcomes in the presence of competing risks: a review of statistical methods and clinical applications.
Varadhan R; Weiss CO; Segal JB; Wu AW; Scharfstein D; Boyd C
Med Care; 2010 Jun; 48(6 Suppl):S96-105. PubMed ID: 20473207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A note on statistical power in multi-site randomized trials with multiple treatments at each site.
Liu XS
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2014 May; 67(2):231-47. PubMed ID: 23710937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of weighted composite compared to traditional composite endpoints for the design of randomized controlled trials.
Bakal JA; Westerhout CM; Armstrong PW
Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Dec; 24(6):980-8. PubMed ID: 22275378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Testing for qualitative interaction using ratios of treatment differences.
Kitsche A; Hothorn LA
Stat Med; 2014 Apr; 33(9):1477-89. PubMed ID: 24302387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components.
Bebu I; Lachin JM
Biostatistics; 2016 Jan; 17(1):178-87. PubMed ID: 26353896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Application of the Wei-Lachin multivariate one-directional test to multiple event-time outcomes.
Lachin JM; Bebu I
Clin Trials; 2015 Dec; 12(6):627-33. PubMed ID: 26336199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Measures of association in clinical trials: definition and interpretation.
Carneiro AV
Rev Port Cardiol; 2003 Nov; 22(11):1393-401. PubMed ID: 14768494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is the Dodo bird endangered in the 21st century? A meta-analysis of treatment comparison studies.
Marcus DK; O'Connell D; Norris AL; Sawaqdeh A
Clin Psychol Rev; 2014 Nov; 34(7):519-30. PubMed ID: 25238455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Opportunities and challenges of combined effect measures based on prioritized outcomes.
Rauch G; Jahn-Eimermacher A; Brannath W; Kieser M
Stat Med; 2014 Mar; 33(7):1104-20. PubMed ID: 24122841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Composite outcomes in clinical trials: uses and problems.
Carneiro AV
Rev Port Cardiol; 2003 Oct; 22(10):1253-63. PubMed ID: 14708338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Validity of composite outcomes in meta-analyses of stroke prevention trials: the case of aspirin.
McGrath E; O'Conghaile A; Eikelboom JW; Dinneen SF; Oczkowski C; O'Donnell MJ
Cerebrovasc Dis; 2011; 32(1):22-7. PubMed ID: 21576939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
