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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23168315)

  • 1. Epidemiologic and statistical methods for comparative effectiveness research.
    Hlatky MA; Winkelmayer WC; Setoguchi S
    Heart Fail Clin; 2013 Jan; 9(1):29-36. PubMed ID: 23168315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Registry-based randomized controlled trials- what are the advantages, challenges, and areas for future research?
    Li G; Sajobi TT; Menon BK; Korngut L; Lowerison M; James M; Wilton SB; Williamson T; Gill S; Drogos LL; Smith EE; Vohra S; Hill MD; Thabane L;
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Dec; 80():16-24. PubMed ID: 27555082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Data sources for heart failure comparative effectiveness research.
    Xian Y; Hammill BG; Curtis LH
    Heart Fail Clin; 2013 Jan; 9(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 23168313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Can statistical linkage of missing variables reduce bias in treatment effect estimates in comparative effectiveness research studies?
    Crown W; Chang J; Olson M; Kahler K; Swindle J; Buzinec P; Shah N; Borah B
    J Comp Eff Res; 2015 Sep; 4(5):455-63. PubMed ID: 26436848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A framework for understanding cancer comparative effectiveness research data needs.
    Carpenter WR; Meyer AM; Abernethy AP; Stürmer T; Kosorok MR
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2012 Nov; 65(11):1150-8. PubMed ID: 23017633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Not Available].
    Trifirò G
    Recenti Prog Med; 2019 Nov; 110(11):528. PubMed ID: 31808434
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Super learning to hedge against incorrect inference from arbitrary parametric assumptions in marginal structural modeling.
    Neugebauer R; Fireman B; Roy JA; Raebel MA; Nichols GA; O'Connor PJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Aug; 66(8 Suppl):S99-109. PubMed ID: 23849160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Administrative databases provide observational studies with high quality].
    Dziri C
    Tunis Med; 2012 Jun; 90(6):425-6. PubMed ID: 22693079
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effectiveness in the Absence of Efficacy: Cautionary Tales From Real-World Evidence.
    Karim S; Booth CM
    J Clin Oncol; 2019 May; 37(13):1047-1050. PubMed ID: 30897036
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Randomized trials or population-based registries.
    Bergqvist D; Björck M; Säwe J; Troëng T
    Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg; 2007 Sep; 34(3):253-6. PubMed ID: 17689818
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: defining, reporting and interpreting nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part I.
    Berger ML; Mamdani M; Atkins D; Johnson ML
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1044-52. PubMed ID: 19793072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study.
    Connor JT; Luce BR; Broglio KR; Ishak KJ; Mullins CD; Vanness DJ; Fleurence R; Saunders E; Davis BR
    Clin Trials; 2013 Oct; 10(5):807-27. PubMed ID: 23983160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. End points for comparative effectiveness research in heart failure.
    Allen LA; Spertus JA
    Heart Fail Clin; 2013 Jan; 9(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 23168314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A practical Bayesian stepped wedge design for community-based cluster-randomized clinical trials: The British Columbia Telehealth Trial.
    Cunanan KM; Carlin BP; Peterson KA
    Clin Trials; 2016 Dec; 13(6):641-650. PubMed ID: 27430710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. New methods for determining comparative effectiveness in rheumatoid arthritis.
    Yun H; Curtis JR
    Curr Opin Rheumatol; 2013 May; 25(3):325-33. PubMed ID: 23508131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. High-dimensional propensity score algorithm in comparative effectiveness research with time-varying interventions.
    Neugebauer R; Schmittdiel JA; Zhu Z; Rassen JA; Seeger JD; Schneeweiss S
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(5):753-81. PubMed ID: 25488047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Proceedings of the University of Pennsylvania 12th annual conference on statistical issues in clinical trials: Electronic health records (EHR) in randomized clinical trials-Challenges and opportunities.
    Ellenberg SS; Ellenberg JH
    Clin Trials; 2020 Aug; 17(4):343-345. PubMed ID: 32522023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. "Lies, damned lies ..." and observational studies in comparative effectiveness research.
    Albert RK
    Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2013 Jun; 187(11):1173-7. PubMed ID: 23725614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Lessons from meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials for analysis of distributed networks of observational databases.
    Bate A; Chuang-Stein C; Roddam A; Jones B
    Pharm Stat; 2019 Jan; 18(1):65-77. PubMed ID: 30362223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The methods of comparative effectiveness research.
    Sox HC; Goodman SN
    Annu Rev Public Health; 2012 Apr; 33():425-45. PubMed ID: 22224891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.