181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23761106)
1. Why caution is recommended with post-hoc individual patient matching for estimation of treatment effect in parallel-group randomized controlled trials: the case of acute stroke trials.
Jafari N; Hearne J; Churilov L
Stat Med; 2013 Nov; 32(25):4467-81. PubMed ID: 23761106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Multiple imputation for patient reported outcome measures in randomised controlled trials: advantages and disadvantages of imputing at the item, subscale or composite score level.
Rombach I; Gray AM; Jenkinson C; Murray DW; Rivero-Arias O
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Aug; 18(1):87. PubMed ID: 30153796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The merits of breaking the matches: a cautionary tale.
Donner A; Taljaard M; Klar N
Stat Med; 2007 Apr; 26(9):2036-51. PubMed ID: 16927437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Calculation of numbers-needed-to-treat in parallel group trials assessing ordinal outcomes: case examples from acute stroke and stroke prevention.
; Bath P; Hogg C; Tracy M; Pocock S
Int J Stroke; 2011 Dec; 6(6):472-9. PubMed ID: 21645271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using balance statistics to determine the optimal number of controls in matching studies.
Linden A; Samuels SJ
J Eval Clin Pract; 2013 Oct; 19(5):968-75. PubMed ID: 23910956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Optimal multivariate matching before randomization.
Greevy R; Lu B; Silber JH; Rosenbaum P
Biostatistics; 2004 Apr; 5(2):263-75. PubMed ID: 15054030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Repeated randomization and matching in multi-arm trials.
Xu Z; Kalbfleisch JD
Biometrics; 2013 Dec; 69(4):949-59. PubMed ID: 24134592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Model misspecification and robustness in causal inference: comparing matching with doubly robust estimation.
Waernbaum I
Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(15):1572-81. PubMed ID: 22359267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of methodological quality and outcome measures of acute stroke randomized controlled trials in China in recent 15 years.
He S; Wu S; Zeng Q; Zhang S; Lin S; Zhang C; Cui X; Liu M
J Evid Based Med; 2012 Aug; 5(3):174-82. PubMed ID: 23672224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Simulation study comparing exposure matching with regression adjustment in an observational safety setting with group sequential monitoring.
Stratton KG; Cook AJ; Jackson LA; Nelson JC
Stat Med; 2015 Mar; 34(7):1117-33. PubMed ID: 25510526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The matching quality of experimental and control interventions in blinded pharmacological randomised clinical trials: a methodological systematic review.
Bello S; Wei M; Hilden J; Hróbjartsson A
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Feb; 16():18. PubMed ID: 26873063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Two-stage instrumental variable methods for estimating the causal odds ratio: analysis of bias.
Cai B; Small DS; Have TR
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(15):1809-24. PubMed ID: 21495062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Survival distributions impact the power of randomized placebo-phase design and parallel groups randomized clinical trials.
Abrahamyan L; Li CS; Beyene J; Willan AR; Feldman BM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Mar; 64(3):286-92. PubMed ID: 20926258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sample size calculations in acute stroke trials: a systematic review of their reporting, characteristics, and relationship with outcome.
Weaver CS; Leonardi-Bee J; Bath-Hextall FJ; Bath PM
Stroke; 2004 May; 35(5):1216-24. PubMed ID: 15031455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Time-dependent confounding in the estimation of treatment effects in randomised trials with multimodal therapies--an illustration of the problem of time-dependent confounding by causal graphs].
Zietemann VD; Schuster T; Duell TH
Gesundheitswesen; 2015 Jan; 77(1):62-6. PubMed ID: 24203687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Learning from past mistakes: assessing trial quality, power and eligibility in non-renal systemic lupus erythematosus randomized controlled trials.
Yuen SY; Pope JE
Rheumatology (Oxford); 2008 Sep; 47(9):1367-72. PubMed ID: 18577549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Inverse probability weighting to estimate causal effect of a singular phase in a multiphase randomized clinical trial for multiple myeloma.
Pezzi A; Cavo M; Biggeri A; Zamagni E; Nanni O
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Nov; 16(1):150. PubMed ID: 27829371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A tale of two methods: randomization versus matching trials in clinical research.
Spiegel D; Kraemer HC; Bloom JR
Psychooncology; 1998; 7(5):371-5. PubMed ID: 9809328
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. "Congratulations, you have been randomized into the control group!(?)": issues to consider when recruiting schools for matched-pair randomized control trials of prevention programs.
Ji P; DuBois DL; Flay BR; Brechling V
J Sch Health; 2008 Mar; 78(3):131-9. PubMed ID: 18307608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Too much ado about propensity score models? Comparing methods of propensity score matching.
Baser O
Value Health; 2006; 9(6):377-85. PubMed ID: 17076868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
