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 *

89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23980524)

  • 1. A diversity index for model space selection in the estimation of benchmark and infectious doses via model averaging.
    Kim SB; Kodell RL; Moon H
    Risk Anal; 2014 Mar; 34(3):453-64. PubMed ID: 23980524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Model uncertainty and model averaging in the estimation of infectious doses for microbial pathogens.
    Moon H; Kim SB; Chen JJ; George NI; Kodell RL
    Risk Anal; 2013 Feb; 33(2):220-31. PubMed ID: 22681783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Properties of model-averaged BMDLs: a study of model averaging in dichotomous response risk estimation.
    Wheeler MW; Bailer AJ
    Risk Anal; 2007 Jun; 27(3):659-70. PubMed ID: 17640214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimation of a benchmark dose in the presence or absence of hormesis using posterior averaging.
    Kim SB; Bartell SM; Gillen DL
    Risk Anal; 2015 Mar; 35(3):396-408. PubMed ID: 25384940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Model averaging in microbial risk assessment using fractional polynomials.
    Namata H; Aerts M; Faes C; Teunis P
    Risk Anal; 2008 Aug; 28(4):891-905. PubMed ID: 18564995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Model uncertainty and risk estimation for experimental studies of quantal responses.
    Bailer AJ; Noble RB; Wheeler MW
    Risk Anal; 2005 Apr; 25(2):291-9. PubMed ID: 15876205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Limits to chemical hormesis as a dose-response model in health risk assessment.
    Mushak P
    Sci Total Environ; 2013 Jan; 443():643-9. PubMed ID: 23220756
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Potential uncertainty reduction in model-averaged benchmark dose estimates informed by an additional dose study.
    Shao K; Small MJ
    Risk Anal; 2011 Oct; 31(10):1561-75. PubMed ID: 21388425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bootstrap estimation of benchmark doses and confidence limits with clustered quantal data.
    Zhu Y; Wang T; Jelsovsky JZ
    Risk Anal; 2007 Apr; 27(2):447-65. PubMed ID: 17511711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing the uncertainty in QUANTEC's dose-response relation of lung and spinal cord with a bootstrap analysis.
    Wedenberg M
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2013 Nov; 87(4):795-801. PubMed ID: 23953634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Harnessing the theoretical foundations of the exponential and beta-Poisson dose-response models to quantify parameter uncertainty using Markov Chain Monte Carlo.
    Schmidt PJ; Pintar KD; Fazil AM; Topp E
    Risk Anal; 2013 Sep; 33(9):1677-93. PubMed ID: 23311599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Goodness-of-fit measures for individual-level models of infectious disease in a Bayesian framework.
    Gardner A; Deardon R; Darlington G
    Spat Spatiotemporal Epidemiol; 2011 Dec; 2(4):273-81. PubMed ID: 22748225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Model averaging using the Kullback information criterion in estimating effective doses for microbial infection and illness.
    Moon H; Kim HJ; Chen JJ; Kodell RL
    Risk Anal; 2005 Oct; 25(5):1147-59. PubMed ID: 16297221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Parameter estimation and uncertainty quantification for an epidemic model.
    Capaldi A; Behrend S; Berman B; Smith J; Wright J; Lloyd AL
    Math Biosci Eng; 2012 Jul; 9(3):553-76. PubMed ID: 22881026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A statistical evaluation of toxicity study designs for the estimation of the benchmark dose in continuous endpoints.
    Slob W; Moerbeek M; Rauniomaa E; Piersma AH
    Toxicol Sci; 2005 Mar; 84(1):167-85. PubMed ID: 15483190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Uncertainties in estimating health risks associated with exposure to ionising radiation.
    Preston RJ; Boice JD; Brill AB; Chakraborty R; Conolly R; Hoffman FO; Hornung RW; Kocher DC; Land CE; Shore RE; Woloschak GE
    J Radiol Prot; 2013 Sep; 33(3):573-88. PubMed ID: 23803503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison of microbial dose-response models fitted to human data.
    Moon H; Chen JJ; Gaylor DW; Kodell RL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Oct; 40(2):177-84. PubMed ID: 15450720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The benchmark dose method--review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment.
    Filipsson AF; Sand S; Nilsson J; Victorin K
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2003; 33(5):505-42. PubMed ID: 14594105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An empirical comparison of low-dose extrapolation from points of departure (PoD) compared to extrapolations based upon methods that account for model uncertainty.
    Wheeler MW; Bailer AJ
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Oct; 67(1):75-82. PubMed ID: 23831127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Monotonic Bayesian semiparametric benchmark dose analysis.
    Wheeler M; Bailer AJ
    Risk Anal; 2012 Jul; 32(7):1207-18. PubMed ID: 22385024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.