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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24882910)

  • 21. When to use the Bonferroni correction.
    Armstrong RA
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2014 Sep; 34(5):502-8. PubMed ID: 24697967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A graphical weighted power improving multiplicity correction approach for SNP selections.
    Saunders G; Fu G; Stevens JR
    Curr Genomics; 2014 Oct; 15(5):380-9. PubMed ID: 25435800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A Monte Carlo Investigation of Methods for Controlling Type I Errors with Specification Searches in Structural Equation Modeling.
    Green SB; Thompson MS; Babyak MA
    Multivariate Behav Res; 1998 Jul; 33(3):365-83. PubMed ID: 26782719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Truncated Simes tests.
    Lawrence J
    Biometrics; 2019 Dec; 75(4):1334-1344. PubMed ID: 31290137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. An evaluation of methods for testing hypotheses relating to two endpoints in a single clinical trial.
    Su TL; Glimm E; Whitehead J; Branson M
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(2):107-17. PubMed ID: 22337619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A power study of a sequential method of p-value adjustment for correlated continuous endpoints.
    Arani RB; Chen JJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 1998 Nov; 8(4):585-98. PubMed ID: 9855036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Inferences about which of J dependent groups has the largest robust measure of location.
    Wilcox RR
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2021 Feb; 74(1):90-98. PubMed ID: 32369607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Multiple comparisons: To compare or not to compare, that is the question.
    Barnett MJ; Doroudgar S; Khosraviani V; Ip EJ
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2022 Feb; 18(2):2331-2334. PubMed ID: 34274218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Accounting for multiple comparisons in a genome-wide association study (GWAS).
    Johnson RC; Nelson GW; Troyer JL; Lautenberger JA; Kessing BD; Winkler CA; O'Brien SJ
    BMC Genomics; 2010 Dec; 11():724. PubMed ID: 21176216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Statistical conclusion validity. Multiple inferences in rehabilitation research.
    Ottenbacher KJ
    Am J Phys Med Rehabil; 1991 Dec; 70(6):317-22. PubMed ID: 1742003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. A comparison of multiplicity adjustment strategies for correlated binary endpoints.
    Leon AC; Heo M
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(5):839-55. PubMed ID: 16080237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparing Performances of Multiple Comparison Methods in Commonly Used 2 × C Contingency Tables.
    Cangur S; Ankarali H; Pasin O
    Interdiscip Sci; 2016 Dec; 8(4):337-345. PubMed ID: 26454649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Simple solution to a common statistical problem: interpreting multiple tests.
    Gordi T; Khamis H
    Clin Ther; 2004 May; 26(5):780-6. PubMed ID: 15220022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A new approach to account for the correlations among single nucleotide polymorphisms in genome: wide association studies.
    Chen Z; Liu Q
    Hum Hered; 2011; 72(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 21849789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A modified Bonferroni method for discrete data.
    Tarone RE
    Biometrics; 1990 Jun; 46(2):515-22. PubMed ID: 2364136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Power and Type I Error Control for Univariate Comparisons in Multivariate Two-Group Designs.
    Frane AV
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2015; 50(2):233-47. PubMed ID: 26609880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Why are two mistakes not worse than one? A proposal for controlling the expected number of false claims.
    Jaki T; Parry A
    Pharm Stat; 2016 Jul; 15(4):362-7. PubMed ID: 27094960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Power and type I error rate of false discovery rate approaches in genome-wide association studies.
    Yang Q; Cui J; Chazaro I; Cupples LA; Demissie S
    BMC Genet; 2005 Dec; 6 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S134. PubMed ID: 16451593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. An efficient Monte Carlo approach to assessing statistical significance in genomic studies.
    Lin DY
    Bioinformatics; 2005 Mar; 21(6):781-7. PubMed ID: 15454414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. On multi-marker tests for association in case-control studies.
    Taub MA; Schwender HR; Younkin SG; Louis TA; Ruczinski I
    Front Genet; 2013; 4():252. PubMed ID: 24379823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.