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 *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22639129)

  • 1. A multi-stage approach to maximizing geocoding success in a large population-based cohort study through automated and interactive processes.
    Sonderman JS; Mumma MT; Cohen SS; Cope EL; Blot WJ; Signorello LB
    Geospat Health; 2012 May; 6(2):273-84. PubMed ID: 22639129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparing a single-stage geocoding method to a multi-stage geocoding method: how much and where do they disagree?
    Lovasi GS; Weiss JC; Hoskins R; Whitsel EA; Rice K; Erickson CF; Psaty BM
    Int J Health Geogr; 2007 Mar; 6():12. PubMed ID: 17367520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Geocoding rural addresses in a community contaminated by PFOA: a comparison of methods.
    Vieira VM; Howard GJ; Gallagher LG; Fletcher T
    Environ Health; 2010 Apr; 9():18. PubMed ID: 20406495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Methods for retrospective geocoding in population studies: the Jackson Heart Study.
    Robinson JC; Wyatt SB; Hickson D; Gwinn D; Faruque F; Sims M; Sarpong D; Taylor HA
    J Urban Health; 2010 Jan; 87(1):136-50. PubMed ID: 20187277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improving geocoding matching rates of structured addresses in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
    Cortes TR; Silveira IHD; Junger WL
    Cad Saude Publica; 2021; 37(7):e00039321. PubMed ID: 34346979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A multifaceted comparison of ArcGIS and MapMarker for automated geocoding.
    Kumar S; Liu M; Hwang SA
    Geospat Health; 2012 Nov; 7(1):145-51. PubMed ID: 23242688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy of two geocoding methods for geographic information system-based exposure assessment in epidemiological studies.
    Faure E; Danjou AM; Clavel-Chapelon F; Boutron-Ruault MC; Dossus L; Fervers B
    Environ Health; 2017 Feb; 16(1):15. PubMed ID: 28235407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of the positional difference between two common geocoding methods.
    Duncan DT; Castro MC; Blossom JC; Bennett GG; Gortmaker SL
    Geospat Health; 2011 May; 5(2):265-73. PubMed ID: 21590677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Geocoding addresses from a large population-based study: lessons learned.
    McElroy JA; Remington PL; Trentham-Dietz A; Robert SA; Newcomb PA
    Epidemiology; 2003 Jul; 14(4):399-407. PubMed ID: 12843762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Match rate and positional accuracy of two geocoding methods for epidemiologic research.
    Zhan FB; Brender JD; De Lima I; Suarez L; Langlois PH
    Ann Epidemiol; 2006 Nov; 16(11):842-9. PubMed ID: 17027286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Positional error in automated geocoding of residential addresses.
    Cayo MR; Talbot TO
    Int J Health Geogr; 2003 Dec; 2(1):10. PubMed ID: 14687425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Geocoding one million of addresses using API: a semiautomatic multistep procedure].
    Mataloni F; Bauleo L; Badaloni C; Nobile F; Savastano J; Noccioli F; Salatino CG; Balducci M; Cappai G; Rosa AC; Asta F; Fusco D; Michelozzi P; Davoli M
    Epidemiol Prev; 2022; 46(3):160-167. PubMed ID: 35443573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of local street network characteristics on the positional accuracy of automated geocoding for geographic health studies.
    Zimmerman DL; Li J
    Int J Health Geogr; 2010 Feb; 9():10. PubMed ID: 20158886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Who Hits the Mark? A Comparative Study of the Free Geocoding Services of Google and OpenStreetMap].
    Lemke D; Mattauch V; Heidinger O; Hense HW
    Gesundheitswesen; 2015 Sep; 77(8-9):e160-5. PubMed ID: 26154258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improving geocoding practices: evaluation of geocoding tools.
    Yang DH; Bilaver LM; Hayes O; Goerge R
    J Med Syst; 2004 Aug; 28(4):361-70. PubMed ID: 15366241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A probabilistic sampling method (PSM) for estimating geographic distance to health services when only the region of residence is known.
    Beyer KM; Saftlas AF; Wallis AB; Peek-Asa C; Rushton G
    Int J Health Geogr; 2011 Jan; 10():4. PubMed ID: 21219638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Modeling the probability distribution of positional errors incurred by residential address geocoding.
    Zimmerman DL; Fang X; Mazumdar S; Rushton G
    Int J Health Geogr; 2007 Jan; 6():1. PubMed ID: 17214903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. On the wrong side of the tracts? Evaluating the accuracy of geocoding in public health research.
    Krieger N; Waterman P; Lemieux K; Zierler S; Hogan JW
    Am J Public Health; 2001 Jul; 91(7):1114-6. PubMed ID: 11441740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Positional accuracy of geocoding from residential postal codes versus full street addresses.
    Khan S; Pinault L; Tjepkema M; Wilkins R
    Health Rep; 2018 Feb; 29(2):3-9. PubMed ID: 29465738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Improved Geocoding of Cancer Registry Addresses in Urban and Rural Oklahoma.
    Dilekli N; Janitz A; Campbell J
    J Registry Manag; 2020; 47(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 32833379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.