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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25609096)

  • 1. Selecting on treatment: a pervasive form of bias in instrumental variable analyses.
    Swanson SA; Robins JM; Miller M; Hernán MA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Feb; 181(3):191-7. PubMed ID: 25609096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. On a preference-based instrumental variable approach in reducing unmeasured confounding-by-indication.
    Li Y; Lee Y; Wolfe RA; Morgenstern H; Zhang J; Port FK; Robinson BM
    Stat Med; 2015 Mar; 34(7):1150-68. PubMed ID: 25546152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Instrumental Variable Analyses and Selection Bias.
    Canan C; Lesko C; Lau B
    Epidemiology; 2017 May; 28(3):396-398. PubMed ID: 28169934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Selection Bias When Using Instrumental Variable Methods to Compare Two Treatments But More Than Two Treatments Are Available.
    Ertefaie A; Small D; Flory J; Hennessy S
    Int J Biostat; 2016 May; 12(1):219-32. PubMed ID: 27227722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Potential bias of instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research.
    Garabedian LF; Chu P; Toh S; Zaslavsky AM; Soumerai SB
    Ann Intern Med; 2014 Jul; 161(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 25023252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Selection Bias When Estimating Average Treatment Effects Using One-sample Instrumental Variable Analysis.
    Hughes RA; Davies NM; Davey Smith G; Tilling K
    Epidemiology; 2019 May; 30(3):350-357. PubMed ID: 30896457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Simple efficient bias corrected instrumental variable estimator for randomized trials with noncompliance.
    Chan KC
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):786-93. PubMed ID: 22484340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparative effectiveness of statin plus fibrate combination therapy and statin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: use of propensity-score and instrumental variable methods to adjust for treatment-selection bias.
    Suh HS; Hay JW; Johnson KA; Doctor JN
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2012 May; 21(5):470-84. PubMed ID: 22461130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bias analysis of the instrumental variable estimator as an estimator of the average causal effect.
    Chiba Y
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2010 Jan; 31(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 19879376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods.
    Stukel TA; Fisher ES; Wennberg DE; Alter DA; Gottlieb DJ; Vermeulen MJ
    JAMA; 2007 Jan; 297(3):278-85. PubMed ID: 17227979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sensitivity analysis and power for instrumental variable studies.
    Wang X; Jiang Y; Zhang NR; Small DS
    Biometrics; 2018 Dec; 74(4):1150-1160. PubMed ID: 29603714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II.
    Cox E; Martin BC; Van Staa T; Garbe E; Siebert U; Johnson ML
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1053-61. PubMed ID: 19744292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. High-dimensional propensity score algorithm in comparative effectiveness research with time-varying interventions.
    Neugebauer R; Schmittdiel JA; Zhu Z; Rassen JA; Seeger JD; Schneeweiss S
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(5):753-81. PubMed ID: 25488047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Eliminating Survivor Bias in Two-stage Instrumental Variable Estimators.
    Vansteelandt S; Walter S; Tchetgen Tchetgen E
    Epidemiology; 2018 Jul; 29(4):536-541. PubMed ID: 29652757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Bias testing, bias correction, and confounder selection using an instrumental variable model.
    Yeob Choi B; Fine JP; Alan Brookhart M
    Stat Med; 2020 Dec; 39(29):4386-4404. PubMed ID: 32854161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Confounder adjustment in observational comparative effectiveness researches: (2) statistical adjustment approaches for unmeasured confounders].
    Huang LL; Wei YY; Chen F
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Nov; 40(11):1450-1455. PubMed ID: 31838820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Survival benefit with drug-eluting stents in observational studies: fact or artifact?
    Venkitachalam L; Lei Y; Magnuson EA; Chan PS; Stolker JM; Kennedy KF; Kleiman NS; Cohen DJ;
    Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2011 Nov; 4(6):587-94. PubMed ID: 21988921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Quantifying the impact of survivor treatment bias in observational studies.
    Austin PC; Mamdani MM; van Walraven C; Tu JV
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2006 Dec; 12(6):601-12. PubMed ID: 17100859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Guidance for a causal comparative effectiveness analysis emulating a target trial based on big real world evidence: when to start statin treatment.
    Kuehne F; Jahn B; Conrads-Frank A; Bundo M; Arvandi M; Endel F; Popper N; Endel G; Urach C; Gyimesi M; Murray EJ; Danaei G; Gaziano TA; Pandya A; Siebert U
    J Comp Eff Res; 2019 Sep; 8(12):1013-1025. PubMed ID: 31512926
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: analytic methods to improve causal inference from nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part III.
    Johnson ML; Crown W; Martin BC; Dormuth CR; Siebert U
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1062-73. PubMed ID: 19793071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.