129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22833620)
1. Instrumental variable analysis.
Stel VS; Dekker FW; Zoccali C; Jager KJ
Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2013 Jul; 28(7):1694-9. PubMed ID: 22833620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods.
Stukel TA; Fisher ES; Wennberg DE; Alter DA; Gottlieb DJ; Vermeulen MJ
JAMA; 2007 Jan; 297(3):278-85. PubMed ID: 17227979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Addressing the issue of channeling bias in observational studies with propensity scores analysis.
Lobo FS; Wagner S; Gross CR; Schommer JC
Res Social Adm Pharm; 2006 Mar; 2(1):143-51. PubMed ID: 17138506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The randomized controlled trial.
Stel VS; Zoccali C; Dekker FW; Jager KJ
Nephron Clin Pract; 2009; 113(4):c337-42. PubMed ID: 19752576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Propensity scores used for analysis of cluster randomized trials with selection bias: a simulation study.
Leyrat C; Caille A; Donner A; Giraudeau B
Stat Med; 2013 Aug; 32(19):3357-72. PubMed ID: 23553813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Propensity score methods and their application in nephrology research.
Barnieh L; James MT; Zhang J; Hemmelgarn BR
J Nephrol; 2011; 24(3):256-62. PubMed ID: 21404223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Survival benefit with drug-eluting stents in observational studies: fact or artifact?
Venkitachalam L; Lei Y; Magnuson EA; Chan PS; Stolker JM; Kennedy KF; Kleiman NS; Cohen DJ;
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2011 Nov; 4(6):587-94. PubMed ID: 21988921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Selection criteria and generalizability within the counterfactual framework: explaining the paradox of antidepressant-induced suicidality?
Weisberg HI; Hayden VC; Pontes VP
Clin Trials; 2009 Apr; 6(2):109-18. PubMed ID: 19342462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Marginal mean weighting through stratification: a generalized method for evaluating multivalued and multiple treatments with nonexperimental data.
Hong G
Psychol Methods; 2012 Mar; 17(1):44-60. PubMed ID: 21843003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. An analysis of randomized controlled trials published in the US family medicine literature, 1987-1991.
Silagy CA; Jewell D; Mant D
J Fam Pract; 1994 Sep; 39(3):236-42. PubMed ID: 8077902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Adjusted Analyses in Studies Addressing Therapy and Harm: Users' Guides to the Medical Literature.
Agoritsas T; Merglen A; Shah ND; O'Donnell M; Guyatt GH
JAMA; 2017 Feb; 317(7):748-759. PubMed ID: 28241362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Bias in research.
Agabegi SS; Stern PJ
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ); 2008 May; 37(5):242-8. PubMed ID: 18587501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Correction of confounding bias in non-randomized studies by appropriate weighting.
Schmoor C; Gall C; Stampf S; Graf E
Biom J; 2011 Mar; 53(2):369-87. PubMed ID: 21308726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evidence from nonrandomized studies: a case study on the estimation of causal effects.
Schmoor C; Caputo A; Schumacher M
Am J Epidemiol; 2008 May; 167(9):1120-9. PubMed ID: 18334500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Regulatory considerations in the design of comparative observational studies using propensity scores.
Yue LQ
J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1272-9. PubMed ID: 23075022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Propensity score methods for estimating relative risks in cluster randomized trials with low-incidence binary outcomes and selection bias.
Leyrat C; Caille A; Donner A; Giraudeau B
Stat Med; 2014 Sep; 33(20):3556-75. PubMed ID: 24771662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Methods to adjust for bias and confounding in critical care health services research involving observational data.
Wunsch H; Linde-Zwirble WT; Angus DC
J Crit Care; 2006 Mar; 21(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 16616616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Adjusting for observable selection bias in block randomized trials.
Ivanova A; Barrier RC; Berger VW
Stat Med; 2005 May; 24(10):1537-46. PubMed ID: 15723426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The selection and design of control conditions for randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions.
Mohr DC; Spring B; Freedland KE; Beckner V; Arean P; Hollon SD; Ockene J; Kaplan R
Psychother Psychosom; 2009; 78(5):275-84. PubMed ID: 19602916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The reverse propensity score to detect selection bias and correct for baseline imbalances.
Berger VW
Stat Med; 2005 Sep; 24(18):2777-87. PubMed ID: 15981305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
