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: 24395074)

  • 21. Adjusting for Confounding in Early Postlaunch Settings: Going Beyond Logistic Regression Models.
    Schmidt AF; Klungel OH; Groenwold RH;
    Epidemiology; 2016 Jan; 27(1):133-42. PubMed ID: 26436519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Propensity score: Interests, use and limitations. A practical guide for clinicians].
    Moulis G; Lapeyre-Mestre M
    Rev Med Interne; 2018 Oct; 39(10):805-812. PubMed ID: 29514739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Systematic differences in treatment effect estimates between propensity score methods and logistic regression.
    Martens EP; Pestman WR; de Boer A; Belitser SV; Klungel OH
    Int J Epidemiol; 2008 Oct; 37(5):1142-7. PubMed ID: 18453634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Doubly robust estimators of causal exposure effects with missing data in the outcome, exposure or a confounder.
    Williamson EJ; Forbes A; Wolfe R
    Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(30):4382-400. PubMed ID: 23086504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Confounding, effect modification, and the odds ratio: common misinterpretations.
    Shrier I; Pang M
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Apr; 68(4):470-4. PubMed ID: 25662008
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Propensity scores: a tool to help quantify treatment effects in observational studies.
    Patino CM; Ferreira JC
    J Bras Pneumol; 2017; 43(2):86. PubMed ID: 28538773
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Propensity scores: a practical method for assessing treatment effects in pain and symptom management research.
    Garrido MM
    J Pain Symptom Manage; 2014 Oct; 48(4):711-8. PubMed ID: 24937162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Re: Comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatments: evaluating statistical adjustments for confounding in observational data.
    Vickers AJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2011 Jul; 103(14):1134; author reply 1134-5. PubMed ID: 21690487
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A simple, flexible, and effective covariate-adaptive treatment allocation procedure.
    Loux TM
    Stat Med; 2013 Sep; 32(22):3775-87. PubMed ID: 23637002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Statistical evaluation of learning curve effects in surgical trials.
    Cook JA; Ramsay CR; Fayers P
    Clin Trials; 2004; 1(5):421-7. PubMed ID: 16279280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Propensity score analysis with missing data.
    Cham H; West SG
    Psychol Methods; 2016 Sep; 21(3):427-45. PubMed ID: 26962757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Ten things to remember about propensity scores.
    Groenwold RHH; Dekkers OM; le Cessie S
    Eur J Endocrinol; 2024 Jul; 191(1):E1-E4. PubMed ID: 38872400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Propensity Score Methods for Bias Reduction in Observational Studies of Treatment Effect.
    Johnson SR; Tomlinson GA; Hawker GA; Granton JT; Feldman BM
    Rheum Dis Clin North Am; 2018 May; 44(2):203-213. PubMed ID: 29622292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Estimation of propensity scores using generalized additive models.
    Woo MJ; Reiter JP; Karr AF
    Stat Med; 2008 Aug; 27(19):3805-16. PubMed ID: 18366144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Instrumental variable analysis.
    Stel VS; Dekker FW; Zoccali C; Jager KJ
    Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2013 Jul; 28(7):1694-9. PubMed ID: 22833620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Propensity score methods for estimating relative risks in cluster randomized trials with low-incidence binary outcomes and selection bias.
    Leyrat C; Caille A; Donner A; Giraudeau B
    Stat Med; 2014 Sep; 33(20):3556-75. PubMed ID: 24771662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Mega-trials: methodological issues and clinical implications.
    Charlton BG
    J R Coll Physicians Lond; 1995; 29(2):96-100. PubMed ID: 7595900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Statistical power in parallel group point exposure studies with time-to-event outcomes: an empirical comparison of the performance of randomized controlled trials and the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach.
    Austin PC; Schuster T; Platt RW
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Oct; 15():87. PubMed ID: 26472109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Methods to adjust for bias and confounding in critical care health services research involving observational data.
    Wunsch H; Linde-Zwirble WT; Angus DC
    J Crit Care; 2006 Mar; 21(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 16616616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The role and significance of sensitivity analyses in enhancing the statistical validity of clinical studies.
    Baiocchi M; Woo YJ; Chiu P; Goldstone AB
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2022 Feb; 163(2):749-753. PubMed ID: 33229182
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.