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 *

182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25012001)

  • 1. The COMET Initiative database: progress and activities from 2011 to 2013.
    Gargon E; Williamson PR; Altman DG; Blazeby JM; Clarke M
    Trials; 2014 Jul; 15():279. PubMed ID: 25012001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The COMET initiative database: progress and activities update (2014).
    Gargon E; Williamson PR; Altman DG; Blazeby JM; Clarke M
    Trials; 2015 Nov; 16():515. PubMed ID: 26558998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The COMET Initiative database: progress and activities update (2015).
    Gargon E; Williamson PR; Altman DG; Blazeby JM; Tunis S; Clarke M
    Trials; 2017 Feb; 18(1):54. PubMed ID: 28159003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The project data sphere initiative: accelerating cancer research by sharing data.
    Green AK; Reeder-Hayes KE; Corty RW; Basch E; Milowsky MI; Dusetzina SB; Bennett AV; Wood WA
    Oncologist; 2015 May; 20(5):464-e20. PubMed ID: 25876994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative: protocol for an international Delphi study to achieve consensus on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a 'core outcome set'.
    Prinsen CA; Vohra S; Rose MR; King-Jones S; Ishaque S; Bhaloo Z; Adams D; Terwee CB
    Trials; 2014 Jun; 15():247. PubMed ID: 24962012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: An Updated Review and User Survey.
    Gorst SL; Gargon E; Clarke M; Blazeby JM; Altman DG; Williamson PR
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(1):e0146444. PubMed ID: 26785121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical trial registries: more international, converging efforts are needed.
    Pansieri C; Pandolfini C; Bonati M
    Trials; 2017 Feb; 18(1):86. PubMed ID: 28241781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Outcomes and endpoints in trials of cancer treatment: the past, present, and future.
    Wilson MK; Karakasis K; Oza AM
    Lancet Oncol; 2015 Jan; 16(1):e32-42. PubMed ID: 25638553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The COMET Handbook: version 1.0.
    Williamson PR; Altman DG; Bagley H; Barnes KL; Blazeby JM; Brookes ST; Clarke M; Gargon E; Gorst S; Harman N; Kirkham JJ; McNair A; Prinsen CAC; Schmitt J; Terwee CB; Young B
    Trials; 2017 Jun; 18(Suppl 3):280. PubMed ID: 28681707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessment of Trends in the Design, Accrual, and Completion of Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov by Sponsor Type, 2000-2019.
    Gresham G; Meinert JL; Gresham AG; Meinert CL
    JAMA Netw Open; 2020 Aug; 3(8):e2014682. PubMed ID: 32845329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The future of clinical trials: A panel discussion.
    D'Agostino R; DeMets D; Friedewald W; Goodman S; Witte J; Geller NL
    Stat Med; 2012 Nov; 31(25):3068-72. PubMed ID: 22806631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Use of Open Access Platforms for Clinical Trial Data.
    Navar AM; Pencina MJ; Rymer JA; Louzao DM; Peterson ED
    JAMA; 2016 Mar 22-29; 315(12):1283-4. PubMed ID: 27002452
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analysis strategies for adaptive designs with multiple endpoints.
    Chang M; Chow SC
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(6):1189-200. PubMed ID: 18027225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The clinician as investigator: participating in clinical trials in the practice setting: Appendix 2: statistical concepts in study design and analysis.
    Lader EW; Cannon CP; Ohman EM; Newby LK; Sulmasy DP; Barst RJ; Fair JM; Flather M; Freedman JE; Frye RL; Hand MM; Jesse RL; Van de Werf F; Costa F;
    Circulation; 2004 Jun; 109(21):e305-7. PubMed ID: 15173053
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Choosing Important Health Outcomes for Comparative Effectiveness Research: An Updated Review and Identification of Gaps.
    Gorst SL; Gargon E; Clarke M; Smith V; Williamson PR
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(12):e0168403. PubMed ID: 27973622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A core outcome set for all types of cardiac surgery effectiveness trials: a study protocol for an international eDelphi survey to achieve consensus on what to measure and the subsequent selection of measurement instruments.
    Moza A; Benstoem C; Autschbach R; Stoppe C; Goetzenich A
    Trials; 2015 Dec; 16():545. PubMed ID: 26625730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. COSUMO: study protocol for the development of a core outcome set for efficacy and effectiveness trials in posterior segment-involving uveitis.
    Tallouzi MO; Mathers JM; Moore DJ; Murray PI; Bucknall N; Blazeby JM; Calvert M; Denniston AK
    Trials; 2017 Dec; 18(1):576. PubMed ID: 29191216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Core outcomes in periodontal trials: study protocol for core outcome set development.
    Lamont TJ; Clarkson JE; Ricketts DNJ; Heasman PA; Ramsay CR
    Trials; 2017 Sep; 18(1):436. PubMed ID: 28931440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Flexible stopping boundaries when changing primary endpoints after unblinded interim analyses.
    Chen LM; Ibrahim JG; Chu H
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(4):817-33. PubMed ID: 24697500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Why clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients.
    Heneghan C; Goldacre B; Mahtani KR
    Trials; 2017 Mar; 18(1):122. PubMed ID: 28288676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.