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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24142836)

  • 1. A latent variable model approach to estimating systematic bias in the oversampling method.
    Hauner KK; Zinbarg RE; Revelle W
    Behav Res Methods; 2014 Sep; 46(3):786-97. PubMed ID: 24142836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effect of sample size and bias on the reliability of estimates of error: a comparative study of Dahlberg's formula.
    Springate SD
    Eur J Orthod; 2012 Apr; 34(2):158-63. PubMed ID: 21447784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Some cautions on the use of instrumental variables estimators in outcomes research: how bias in instrumental variables estimators is affected by instrument strength, instrument contamination, and sample size.
    Crown WH; Henk HJ; Vanness DJ
    Value Health; 2011 Dec; 14(8):1078-84. PubMed ID: 22152177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Power and sample size when multiple endpoints are considered.
    Senn S; Bretz F
    Pharm Stat; 2007; 6(3):161-70. PubMed ID: 17674404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Polychotomization of continuous variables in regression models based on the overall C index.
    Tsuruta H; Bax L
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2006 Dec; 6():41. PubMed ID: 17169154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accounting for response misclassification and covariate measurement error improves power and reduces bias in epidemiologic studies.
    Cheng D; Branscum AJ; Stamey JD
    Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Jul; 20(7):562-7. PubMed ID: 20538200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Rapid gridding reconstruction with a minimal oversampling ratio.
    Beatty PJ; Nishimura DG; Pauly JM
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2005 Jun; 24(6):799-808. PubMed ID: 15959939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The number of subjects per variable required in linear regression analyses.
    Austin PC; Steyerberg EW
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jun; 68(6):627-36. PubMed ID: 25704724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of small health risks based on exact sample sizes.
    Abt K; Gülich A
    Stat Med; 1996 Jan; 15(2):183-95. PubMed ID: 8614754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Concepts in sample size determination.
    Rao UK
    Indian J Dent Res; 2012; 23(5):660-4. PubMed ID: 23422614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Modeling late entry bias in survival analysis.
    Matsuura M; Eguchi S
    Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):559-66. PubMed ID: 16011705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A modified approach to estimating sample size for simple logistic regression with one continuous covariate.
    Novikov I; Fund N; Freedman LS
    Stat Med; 2010 Jan; 29(1):97-107. PubMed ID: 19823978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Improving the accuracy of livestock distribution estimates through spatial interpolation.
    Bryssinckx W; Ducheyne E; Muhwezi B; Godfrey S; Mintiens K; Leirs H; Hendrickx G
    Geospat Health; 2012 Nov; 7(1):101-9. PubMed ID: 23242685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Oversampling and replacement strategies in propensity score matching: a critical review focused on small sample size in clinical settings.
    Bottigliengo D; Baldi I; Lanera C; Lorenzoni G; Bejko J; Bottio T; Tarzia V; Carrozzini M; Gerosa G; Berchialla P; Gregori D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Nov; 21(1):256. PubMed ID: 34809559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparing four methods to estimate usual intake distributions.
    Souverein OW; Dekkers AL; Geelen A; Haubrock J; de Vries JH; Ocké MC; Harttig U; Boeing H; van 't Veer P;
    Eur J Clin Nutr; 2011 Jul; 65 Suppl 1():S92-101. PubMed ID: 21731012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Blinded and unblinded internal pilot study designs for clinical trials with count data.
    Schneider S; Schmidli H; Friede T
    Biom J; 2013 Jul; 55(4):617-33. PubMed ID: 23703749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A simulation-based evaluation of methods to estimate the impact of an adverse event on hospital length of stay.
    Samore MH; Shen S; Greene T; Stoddard G; Sauer B; Shinogle J; Nebeker J; Harbarth S
    Med Care; 2007 Oct; 45(10 Supl 2):S108-15. PubMed ID: 17909368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The impact of sample non-normality on ANOVA and alternative methods.
    Lantz B
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 May; 66(2):224-44. PubMed ID: 22624658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The use of bootstrap methods for estimating sample size and analysing health-related quality of life outcomes.
    Walters SJ; Campbell MJ
    Stat Med; 2005 Apr; 24(7):1075-102. PubMed ID: 15570625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.