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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25123473)

  • 1. Correcting for the bias caused by exposure measurement error in epidemiological studies.
    Fahey MT; Forbes AB; Hodge AM
    Respirology; 2014 Oct; 19(7):979-84. PubMed ID: 25123473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Measurement error in epidemiologic studies of air pollution based on land-use regression models.
    Basagaña X; Aguilera I; Rivera M; Agis D; Foraster M; Marrugat J; Elosua R; Künzli N
    Am J Epidemiol; 2013 Oct; 178(8):1342-6. PubMed ID: 24105967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Performance of bias-correction methods for exposure measurement error using repeated measurements with and without missing data.
    Batistatou E; McNamee R
    Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(28):3467-80. PubMed ID: 22733598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The effect of non-differential measurement error on bias, precision and power in Mendelian randomization studies.
    Pierce BL; VanderWeele TJ
    Int J Epidemiol; 2012 Oct; 41(5):1383-93. PubMed ID: 23045203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. On using summary statistics from an external calibration sample to correct for covariate measurement error.
    Guo Y; Little RJ; McConnell DS
    Epidemiology; 2012 Jan; 23(1):165-74. PubMed ID: 22157312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Regression calibration for classical exposure measurement error in environmental epidemiology studies using multiple local surrogate exposures.
    Bateson TF; Wright JM
    Am J Epidemiol; 2010 Aug; 172(3):344-52. PubMed ID: 20573838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A simulation-based comparison of techniques to correct for measurement error in matched case-control studies.
    Guolo A; Brazzale AR
    Stat Med; 2008 Aug; 27(19):3755-75. PubMed ID: 18407572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Correcting for Measurement Error in Time-Varying Covariates in Marginal Structural Models.
    Kyle RP; Moodie EE; Klein MB; Abrahamowicz M
    Am J Epidemiol; 2016 Aug; 184(3):249-58. PubMed ID: 27416840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using Sensitivity Analyses for Unobserved Confounding to Address Covariate Measurement Error in Propensity Score Methods.
    Rudolph KE; Stuart EA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2018 Mar; 187(3):604-613. PubMed ID: 28992211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Multiple-imputation for measurement-error correction.
    Cole SR; Chu H; Greenland S
    Int J Epidemiol; 2006 Aug; 35(4):1074-81. PubMed ID: 16709616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A multivariate method for measurement error correction using pairs of concentration biomarkers.
    Fraser GE; Yan R
    Ann Epidemiol; 2007 Jan; 17(1):64-73. PubMed ID: 17140813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Varied forms of bias due to nondifferential error in measuring exposure.
    Brenner H; Loomis D
    Epidemiology; 1994 Sep; 5(5):510-7. PubMed ID: 7986865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Fully parametric and semi-parametric regression models for common events with covariate measurement error in main study/validation study designs.
    Spiegelman D; Casella M
    Biometrics; 1997 Jun; 53(2):395-409. PubMed ID: 9192443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Statistical methods for epidemiologic studies of the health effects of air pollution.
    Navidi W; Thomas D; Langholz B; Stram D
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 1999 May; (86):1-50; discussion 51-6. PubMed ID: 10465799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sensitivity of regression calibration to non-perfect validation data with application to the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study.
    Buonaccorsi JP; Dalen I; Laake P; Hjartåker A; Engeset D; Thoresen M
    Stat Med; 2015 Apr; 34(8):1389-403. PubMed ID: 25627982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Commentary: dealing with measurement error: multiple imputation or regression calibration?
    White IR
    Int J Epidemiol; 2006 Aug; 35(4):1081-2. PubMed ID: 16847023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bias in clinical epidemiological study designs.
    Rivas-Ruiz F; Pérez-Vicente S; González-Ramírez AR
    Allergol Immunopathol (Madr); 2013; 41(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 23036443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accounting for response misclassification and covariate measurement error improves power and reduces bias in epidemiologic studies.
    Cheng D; Branscum AJ; Stamey JD
    Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Jul; 20(7):562-7. PubMed ID: 20538200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of regression calibration and SIMEX methods in logistic regression when one of the predictors is subject to additive measurement error.
    Fung KY; Krewski D
    J Epidemiol Biostat; 1999; 4(2):65-74. PubMed ID: 10619053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Issues in Implementing Regression Calibration Analyses.
    Boe LA; Shaw PA; Midthune D; Gustafson P; Kipnis V; Park E; Sotres-Alvarez D; Freedman L; Of The Stratos Initiative OBOTMEAMTGT
    Am J Epidemiol; 2023 Aug; 192(8):1406-1414. PubMed ID: 37092245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.