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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24773357)

  • 1. Measurement-comparable effect sizes for single-case studies of free-operant behavior.
    Pustejovsky JE
    Psychol Methods; 2015 Sep; 20(3):342-59. PubMed ID: 24773357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Procedural sensitivities of effect sizes for single-case designs with directly observed behavioral outcome measures.
    Pustejovsky JE
    Psychol Methods; 2019 Apr; 24(2):217-235. PubMed ID: 29911874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A standardized mean difference effect size for multiple baseline designs across individuals.
    Hedges LV; Pustejovsky JE; Shadish WR
    Res Synth Methods; 2013 Dec; 4(4):324-41. PubMed ID: 26053946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Using response ratios for meta-analyzing single-case designs with behavioral outcomes.
    Pustejovsky JE
    J Sch Psychol; 2018 Jun; 68():99-112. PubMed ID: 29861034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing Single Case Design Overlap-Based Effect Size Metrics From Studies Examining Speech Generating Device Interventions.
    Chen M; Hyppa-Martin JK; Reichle JE; Symons FJ
    Am J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2016 May; 121(3):169-93. PubMed ID: 27119210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke.
    Higashida RT; Furlan AJ; Roberts H; Tomsick T; Connors B; Barr J; Dillon W; Warach S; Broderick J; Tilley B; Sacks D; ;
    Stroke; 2003 Aug; 34(8):e109-37. PubMed ID: 12869717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1.
    Jansen JP; Fleurence R; Devine B; Itzler R; Barrett A; Hawkins N; Lee K; Boersma C; Annemans L; Cappelleri JC
    Value Health; 2011 Jun; 14(4):417-28. PubMed ID: 21669366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Size and consistency of problem-solving consultation outcomes: an empirical analysis.
    Hurwitz JT; Kratochwill TR; Serlin RC
    J Sch Psychol; 2015 Apr; 53(2):161-78. PubMed ID: 25746825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2.
    Hoaglin DC; Hawkins N; Jansen JP; Scott DA; Itzler R; Cappelleri JC; Boersma C; Thompson D; Larholt KM; Diaz M; Barrett A
    Value Health; 2011 Jun; 14(4):429-37. PubMed ID: 21669367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluating single-case research data for systematic review: a commentary for the special issue.
    Maggin DM; Odom SL
    J Sch Psychol; 2014 Apr; 52(2):237-41. PubMed ID: 24606978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analysis and meta-analysis of single-case designs with a standardized mean difference statistic: a primer and applications.
    Shadish WR; Hedges LV; Pustejovsky JE
    J Sch Psychol; 2014 Apr; 52(2):123-47. PubMed ID: 24606972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Between-case standardized effect size analysis of single case designs: Examination of the two methods.
    Odom SL; Barton EE; Reichow B; Swaminathan H; Pustejovsky JE
    Res Dev Disabil; 2018 Aug; 79():88-96. PubMed ID: 29807692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The metric comparability of meta-analytic effect-size estimators from factorial designs.
    Gillett R
    Psychol Methods; 2003 Dec; 8(4):419-33. PubMed ID: 14664680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Meta- and statistical analysis of single-case intervention research data: quantitative gifts and a wish list.
    Kratochwill TR; Levin JR
    J Sch Psychol; 2014 Apr; 52(2):231-5. PubMed ID: 24606977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect size calculations for the clinician: methods and comparability.
    Seidel JA; Miller SD; Chow DL
    Psychother Res; 2014; 24(4):470-84. PubMed ID: 24188906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect size in single-case research: a review of nine nonoverlap techniques.
    Parker RI; Vannest KJ; Davis JL
    Behav Modif; 2011 Jul; 35(4):303-22. PubMed ID: 21411481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A Gradual Effects Model for Single-Case Designs.
    Swan DM; Pustejovsky JE
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2018; 53(4):574-593. PubMed ID: 29757002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mathematical expression and sampling issues of treatment contrasts: Beyond significance testing and meta-analysis to clinically useful research synthesis.
    Krause MS
    Psychother Res; 2018 Jan; 28(1):58-75. PubMed ID: 27581109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Analysis and meta-analysis of single-case designs: an introduction.
    Shadish WR
    J Sch Psychol; 2014 Apr; 52(2):109-22. PubMed ID: 24606971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Some recommended statistical analytic practices when reliability generalization studies are conducted.
    Sánchez-Meca J; López-López JA; López-Pina JA
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 Nov; 66(3):402-25. PubMed ID: 23046285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.