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 *

208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23184532)

  • 1. Evaluating the robustness of repeated measures analyses: the case of small sample sizes and nonnormal data.
    Oberfeld D; Franke T
    Behav Res Methods; 2013 Sep; 45(3):792-812. PubMed ID: 23184532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using the linear mixed model to analyze nonnormal data distributions in longitudinal designs.
    Arnau J; Bono R; Blanca MJ; Bendayan R
    Behav Res Methods; 2012 Dec; 44(4):1224-38. PubMed ID: 22399245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An examination of the robustness of the empirical Bayes and other approaches for testing main and interaction effects in repeated measures designs.
    Keselman HJ; Kowalchuk RK; Boik RJ
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2000 May; 53 ( Pt 1)():51-67. PubMed ID: 10895522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of Test Statistics of Nonnormal and Unbalanced Samples for Multivariate Analysis of Variance in terms of Type-I Error Rates.
    Ateş C; Kaymaz Ö; Kale HE; Tekindal MA
    Comput Math Methods Med; 2019; 2019():2173638. PubMed ID: 31396289
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of bias-corrected covariance estimators for MMRM analysis in longitudinal data with dropouts.
    Gosho M; Hirakawa A; Noma H; Maruo K; Sato Y
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Oct; 26(5):2389-2406. PubMed ID: 26265765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of heteroscedasticity between treatment groups on mixed-effects models for repeated measures.
    Gosho M; Maruo K
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Sep; 17(5):578-592. PubMed ID: 29978944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Effect of the violation of normality and sphericity in the linear mixed model in split-plot designs].
    Arnau J; Bendayan R; Blanca MJ; Bono R
    Psicothema; 2012; 24(3):449-54. PubMed ID: 22748739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sphericity estimation bias for repeated measures designs in simulation studies.
    Bono R; Arnau J; Blanca MJ; Alarcón R
    Behav Res Methods; 2016 Dec; 48(4):1621-1630. PubMed ID: 26489849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Properties of internal pilots with the univariate approach to repeated measures.
    Coffey CS; Muller KE
    Stat Med; 2003 Aug; 22(15):2469-85. PubMed ID: 12872303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Violation of the Sphericity Assumption and Its Effect on Type-I Error Rates in Repeated Measures ANOVA and Multi-Level Linear Models (MLM).
    Haverkamp N; Beauducel A
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():1841. PubMed ID: 29089917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Should we rely on the Kenward-Roger approximation when using linear mixed models if the groups have different distributions?
    Arnau J; Bendayan R; Blanca MJ; Bono R
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2014 Nov; 67(3):408-29. PubMed ID: 24028625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparing denominator degrees of freedom approximations for the generalized linear mixed model in analyzing binary outcome in small sample cluster-randomized trials.
    Li P; Redden DT
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Apr; 15():38. PubMed ID: 25899170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The analysis of very small samples of repeated measurements I: an adjusted sandwich estimator.
    Skene SS; Kenward MG
    Stat Med; 2010 Nov; 29(27):2825-37. PubMed ID: 20839367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of Two Procedures for Analyzing Small Sets of Repeated Measures Data.
    Vallejo G; Livacic-Rojas P
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2005 Apr; 40(2):179-205. PubMed ID: 26760106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Tests for gaussian repeated measures with missing data in small samples.
    Catellier DJ; Muller KE
    Stat Med; 2000 Apr; 19(8):1101-14. PubMed ID: 10790683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of skewness and kurtosis on the robustness of linear mixed models.
    Arnau J; Bendayan R; Blanca MJ; Bono R
    Behav Res Methods; 2013 Sep; 45(3):873-9. PubMed ID: 23299397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison of recent methods for the analysis of small-sample cross-over studies.
    Chen X; Wei L
    Stat Med; 2003 Sep; 22(18):2821-33. PubMed ID: 12953282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Closed-form REML estimators and sample size determination for mixed effects models for repeated measures under monotone missingness.
    Tang Y
    Stat Med; 2017 Jun; 36(13):2135-2147. PubMed ID: 28226391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Variable error: variance-covariance heterogeneity, block size and type L error rates.
    Gessaroli ME; Schutz RW
    J Mot Behav; 1983 Mar; 15(1):74-95. PubMed ID: 15151885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Analyzing Multivariate Repeated Measures Designs: A Comparison of Two Approximate Degrees of Freedom Procedures.
    Lix LM; Algina J; Keselman HJ
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2003 Oct; 38(4):403-31. PubMed ID: 26777441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.