262 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23553898)
1. Planning and evaluating clinical trials with composite time-to-first-event endpoints in a competing risk framework.
Rauch G; Beyersmann J
Stat Med; 2013 Sep; 32(21):3595-608. PubMed ID: 23553898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Easily applicable multiple testing procedures to improve the interpretation of clinical trials with composite endpoints.
Schüler S; Mucha A; Doherty P; Kieser M; Rauch G
Int J Cardiol; 2014 Jul; 175(1):126-32. PubMed ID: 24861257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Multiplicity adjustment for composite binary endpoints.
Rauch G; Kieser M
Methods Inf Med; 2012; 51(4):309-17. PubMed ID: 22525969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bayesian design and analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials with multiple dependent binary outcomes.
Zaslavsky BG
Pharm Stat; 2013; 12(4):207-12. PubMed ID: 23625660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Competing time-to-event endpoints in cardiology trials: a simulation study to illustrate the importance of an adequate statistical analysis.
Rauch G; Kieser M; Ulrich S; Doherty P; Rauch B; Schneider S; Riemer T; Senges J
Eur J Prev Cardiol; 2014 Jan; 21(1):74-80. PubMed ID: 22964966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Power and sample size considerations in clinical trials with competing risk endpoints.
Maki E
Pharm Stat; 2006; 5(3):159-71. PubMed ID: 17080750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities.
Pocock SJ; Ariti CA; Collier TJ; Wang D
Eur Heart J; 2012 Jan; 33(2):176-82. PubMed ID: 21900289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials.
Huque MF; Alosh M; Bhore R
J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Jul; 21(4):610-34. PubMed ID: 21516560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Importance of baseline distribution of proteinuria in renal outcomes trials: lessons from the reduction of endpoints in NIDDM with the angiotensin II antagonist losartan (RENAAL) study.
Zhang Z; Shahinfar S; Keane WF; Ramjit D; Dickson TZ; Gleim GW; Mogensen CE; de Zeeuw D; Brenner BM; Snapinn SM
J Am Soc Nephrol; 2005 Jun; 16(6):1775-80. PubMed ID: 15872078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Sample sizes for clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints and competing risks.
Schulgen G; Olschewski M; Krane V; Wanner C; Ruf G; Schumacher M
Contemp Clin Trials; 2005 Jun; 26(3):386-96. PubMed ID: 15911472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating health outcomes in the presence of competing risks: a review of statistical methods and clinical applications.
Varadhan R; Weiss CO; Segal JB; Wu AW; Scharfstein D; Boyd C
Med Care; 2010 Jun; 48(6 Suppl):S96-105. PubMed ID: 20473207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Some Issues of Sample Size Calculation for Time-to-Event Endpoints Using the Freedman and Schoenfeld Formulas.
Abel UR; Jensen K; Karapanagiotou-Schenkel I; Kieser M
J Biopharm Stat; 2015; 25(6):1285-311. PubMed ID: 25629760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of weighted composite compared to traditional composite endpoints for the design of randomized controlled trials.
Bakal JA; Westerhout CM; Armstrong PW
Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Dec; 24(6):980-8. PubMed ID: 22275378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Designing phase II studies in cancer with time-to-event endpoints.
Owzar K; Jung SH
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(3):209-21. PubMed ID: 18559409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sample size determination in clinical trials with multiple co-primary endpoints including mixed continuous and binary variables.
Sozu T; Sugimoto T; Hamasaki T
Biom J; 2012 Sep; 54(5):716-29. PubMed ID: 22829198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Determining the most appropriate components for a composite clinical trial outcome.
Bethel MA; Holman R; Haffner SM; Califf RM; Huntsman-Labed A; Hua TA; McMurray J
Am Heart J; 2008 Oct; 156(4):633-40. PubMed ID: 18926145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Efficacy and safety of angiotensin II receptor blockade in elderly patients with diabetes.
Winkelmayer WC; Zhang Z; Shahinfar S; Cooper ME; Avorn J; Brenner BM
Diabetes Care; 2006 Oct; 29(10):2210-7. PubMed ID: 17003295
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Adaptive Designs with Discrete Test Statistics and Consideration of Overrunning.
Schmidt R; Burkhardt B; Faldum A
Methods Inf Med; 2015; 54(5):434-46. PubMed ID: 26429500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A systematic comparison of recurrent event models for application to composite endpoints.
Ozga AK; Kieser M; Rauch G
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Jan; 18(1):2. PubMed ID: 29301487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Multiple-arm superiority and non-inferiority designs with various endpoints.
Chang M
Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 17323311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
