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 *

308 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22763957)

  • 1. Estimation of treatment effect under non-proportional hazards and conditionally independent censoring.
    Boyd AP; Kittelson JM; Gillen DL
    Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(28):3504-15. PubMed ID: 22763957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Estimation of treatment effects based on possibly misspecified Cox regression.
    Hattori S; Henmi M
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2012 Oct; 18(4):408-33. PubMed ID: 22527680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Robust inference in discrete hazard models for randomized clinical trials.
    Nguyen VQ; Gillen DL
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2012 Oct; 18(4):446-69. PubMed ID: 22810273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. On hazard ratio estimators by proportional hazards models in matched-pair cohort studies.
    Shinozaki T; Mansournia MA; Matsuyama Y
    Emerg Themes Epidemiol; 2017; 14():6. PubMed ID: 28592984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improved precision in the analysis of randomized trials with survival outcomes, without assuming proportional hazards.
    Díaz I; Colantuoni E; Hanley DF; Rosenblum M
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2019 Jul; 25(3):439-468. PubMed ID: 29492746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Explained randomness in proportional hazards models.
    O'Quigley J; Xu R; Stare J
    Stat Med; 2005 Feb; 24(3):479-89. PubMed ID: 15532086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Analysis of survival data with missing measurements of a time-dependent binary covariate.
    Halabi S; Wun CC; Davis BR
    J Biopharm Stat; 2003 May; 13(2):253-70. PubMed ID: 12729393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Model selection for survival individualized treatment rules using the jackknife estimator.
    Honvoh GD; Cho H; Kosorok MR
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Dec; 22(1):328. PubMed ID: 36550398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Correcting for dependent censoring in routine outcome monitoring data by applying the inverse probability censoring weighted estimator.
    Willems S; Schat A; van Noorden MS; Fiocco M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Feb; 27(2):323-335. PubMed ID: 26988930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Weighted estimation of the accelerated failure time model in the presence of dependent censoring.
    Cho Y; Ghosh D
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(4):e0124381. PubMed ID: 25909753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On confidence intervals for the hazard ratio in randomized clinical trials.
    Lin DY; Dai L; Cheng G; Sailer MO
    Biometrics; 2016 Dec; 72(4):1098-1102. PubMed ID: 27123760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Robust versus consistent variance estimators in marginal structural Cox models.
    Enders D; Engel S; Linder R; Pigeot I
    Stat Med; 2018 Oct; 37(24):3455-3470. PubMed ID: 29888510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Locally efficient estimation of the quality-adjusted lifetime distribution with right-censored data and covariates.
    van der Laan MJ; Hubbard A
    Biometrics; 1999 Jun; 55(2):530-6. PubMed ID: 11318210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An approach to trial design and analysis in the era of non-proportional hazards of the treatment effect.
    Royston P; Parmar MK
    Trials; 2014 Aug; 15():314. PubMed ID: 25098243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The net benefit for time-to-event outcome in oncology clinical trials with treatment switching.
    Fukuda M; Sakamaki K; Oba K
    Clin Trials; 2023 Dec; 20(6):670-680. PubMed ID: 37455538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Analysis of accelerated failure time data with dependent censoring using auxiliary variables via nonparametric multiple imputation.
    Hsu CH; Taylor JM; Hu C
    Stat Med; 2015 Aug; 34(19):2768-80. PubMed ID: 25999295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Variance estimation in inverse probability weighted Cox models.
    Shu D; Young JG; Toh S; Wang R
    Biometrics; 2021 Sep; 77(3):1101-1117. PubMed ID: 32662087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Does Cox analysis of a randomized survival study yield a causal treatment effect?
    Aalen OO; Cook RJ; Røysland K
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2015 Oct; 21(4):579-93. PubMed ID: 26100005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sample size and robust marginal methods for cluster-randomized trials with censored event times.
    Zhong Y; Cook RJ
    Stat Med; 2015 Mar; 34(6):901-23. PubMed ID: 25522033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. How serious is bias in effect estimation in randomised trials with survival data given risk heterogeneity and informative censoring?
    McNamee R
    Stat Med; 2017 Sep; 36(21):3315-3333. PubMed ID: 28621000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.