311 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24463885)
1. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating absolute effects of treatments on survival outcomes: A simulation study.
Austin PC; Schuster T
Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Oct; 25(5):2214-2237. PubMed ID: 24463885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The performance of inverse probability of treatment weighting and full matching on the propensity score in the presence of model misspecification when estimating the effect of treatment on survival outcomes.
Austin PC; Stuart EA
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Aug; 26(4):1654-1670. PubMed ID: 25934643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2013 Jul; 32(16):2837-49. PubMed ID: 23239115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Variance estimation of the risk difference when using propensity-score matching and weighting with time-to-event outcomes.
Cafri G; Austin PC
Pharm Stat; 2023; 22(5):880-902. PubMed ID: 37258420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2014 Mar; 33(7):1242-58. PubMed ID: 24122911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Estimating the effect of treatment on binary outcomes using full matching on the propensity score.
Austin PC; Stuart EA
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Dec; 26(6):2505-2525. PubMed ID: 26329750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Optimal full matching for survival outcomes: a method that merits more widespread use.
Austin PC; Stuart EA
Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(30):3949-67. PubMed ID: 26250611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the performance of the generalized propensity score for estimating the effect of quantitative or continuous exposures on survival or time-to-event outcomes.
Austin PC
Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Aug; 28(8):2348-2367. PubMed ID: 29869566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(20):2137-48. PubMed ID: 20108233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. On the use of propensity scores in case of rare exposure.
Hajage D; Tubach F; Steg PG; Bhatt DL; De Rycke Y
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Mar; 16():38. PubMed ID: 27036963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Bias associated with using the estimated propensity score as a regression covariate.
Hade EM; Lu B
Stat Med; 2014 Jan; 33(1):74-87. PubMed ID: 23787715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Propensity-score matching with competing risks in survival analysis.
Austin PC; Fine JP
Stat Med; 2019 Feb; 38(5):751-777. PubMed ID: 30347461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Double propensity-score adjustment: A solution to design bias or bias due to incomplete matching.
Austin PC
Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Feb; 26(1):201-222. PubMed ID: 25038071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance evaluation of regression splines for propensity score adjustment in post-market safety analysis with multiple treatments.
Tian Y; Baro E; Zhang R
J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(5):810-821. PubMed ID: 31502924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Covariate-adjusted survival analyses in propensity-score matched samples: Imputing potential time-to-event outcomes.
Austin PC; Thomas N; Rubin DB
Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Mar; 29(3):728-751. PubMed ID: 30569832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Variance estimation when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with survival analysis.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2016 Dec; 35(30):5642-5655. PubMed ID: 27549016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Propensity score applied to survival data analysis through proportional hazards models: a Monte Carlo study.
Gayat E; Resche-Rigon M; Mary JY; Porcher R
Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(3):222-9. PubMed ID: 22411785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulations.
Austin PC
Biom J; 2009 Feb; 51(1):171-84. PubMed ID: 19197955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing the performance of the generalized propensity score for estimating the effect of quantitative or continuous exposures on binary outcomes.
Austin PC
Stat Med; 2018 May; 37(11):1874-1894. PubMed ID: 29508424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
