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)

  • 21. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II.
    Cox E; Martin BC; Van Staa T; Garbe E; Siebert U; Johnson ML
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1053-61. PubMed ID: 19744292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Overview of the epidemiology methods and applications: strengths and limitations of observational study designs.
    Colditz GA
    Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr; 2010; 50 Suppl 1(s1):10-2. PubMed ID: 21132580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Database Research for Pediatric Infectious Diseases.
    Kronman MP; Gerber JS; Newland JG; Hersh AL
    J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc; 2015 Jun; 4(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 26407414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The value of observational research in liver diseases.
    Lindor RA; Lindor KD
    Hepatology; 2011 Jan; 53(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 21254155
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Role of electronic health records in comparative effectiveness research.
    Gallego B; Dunn AG; Coiera E
    J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Nov; 2(6):529-32. PubMed ID: 24236790
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Harnessing electronic healthcare data for wound care research: Standards for reporting observational registry data obtained directly from electronic health records.
    Fife CE; Eckert KA
    Wound Repair Regen; 2017 Apr; 25(2):192-209. PubMed ID: 28370796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparative effectiveness research using registries, databases, and networks in women's and children's health: Time to embrace the future?
    Shah PS; Acharya G
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2018 Nov; 97(11):1285-1286. PubMed ID: 30280377
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparative effectiveness research: guidelines for good practices are just the beginning.
    Johnson ML; Chitnis AS
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2011 Feb; 11(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 21351858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Making observational studies count: shaping the future of comparative effectiveness research.
    Dreyer NA
    Epidemiology; 2011 May; 22(3):295-7. PubMed ID: 21464648
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. eRegistries: indicators for the WHO Essential Interventions for reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health.
    Flenady V; Wojcieszek AM; Fjeldheim I; Friberg IK; Nankabirwa V; Jani JV; Myhre S; Middleton P; Crowther C; Ellwood D; Tudehope D; Pattinson R; Ho J; Matthews J; Bermudez Ortega A; Venkateswaran M; Chou D; Say L; Mehl G; Frøen JF
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2016 Sep; 16(1):293. PubMed ID: 27716088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The prompted optional randomization trial: a new design for comparative effectiveness research.
    Flory J; Karlawish J
    Am J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 102(12):e8-10. PubMed ID: 23078493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. From randomized trials to registry studies: translating data into clinical information.
    Brown ML; Gersh BJ; Holmes DR; Bailey KR; Sundt TM
    Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med; 2008 Oct; 5(10):613-20. PubMed ID: 18679381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. How Do You Know Which Health Care Effectiveness Research You Can Trust? A Guide to Study Design for the Perplexed.
    Soumerai SB; Starr D; Majumdar SR
    Prev Chronic Dis; 2015 Jun; 12():E101. PubMed ID: 26111157
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Cutting through the statistical fog: understanding and evaluating non-inferiority trials.
    Weintraub WS
    Int J Clin Pract; 2010 Sep; 64(10):1359-66. PubMed ID: 20716144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Preference option randomized design (PORD) for comparative effectiveness research: Statistical power for testing comparative effect, preference effect, selection effect, intent-to-treat effect, and overall effect.
    Heo M; Meissner P; Litwin AH; Arnsten JH; McKee MD; Karasz A; McKinley P; Rehm CD; Chambers EC; Yeh MC; Wylie-Rosett J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Feb; 28(2):626-640. PubMed ID: 29121828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Databases for surgical health services research: Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients.
    Montgomery JR; Mathur AK; Lynch RJ
    Surgery; 2019 May; 165(5):879-881. PubMed ID: 30389172
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Innovative Clinical Trial Designs for Precision Medicine in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.
    Shah SJ
    J Cardiovasc Transl Res; 2017 Jun; 10(3):322-336. PubMed ID: 28681133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The use of clinical trials in comparative effectiveness research on mental health.
    Blanco C; Rafful C; Olfson M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2013 Aug; 66(8 Suppl):S29-36. PubMed ID: 23849150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Approaches to answering critical CER questions.
    Kinnier CV; Chung JW; Bilimoria KY
    Cancer Treat Res; 2015; 164():1-14. PubMed ID: 25677015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Bandit solutions provide unified ethical models for randomized clinical trials and comparative effectiveness research.
    Press WH
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2009 Dec; 106(52):22387-92. PubMed ID: 20018711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.