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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25677020)

  • 1. Comparative effectiveness in head and neck malignancies.
    Lewis CM; Hutcheson KA; Kupferman ME
    Cancer Treat Res; 2015; 164():89-99. PubMed ID: 25677020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Observational study designs for comparative effectiveness research: an alternative approach to close evidence gaps in head-and-neck cancer.
    Goulart BH; Ramsey SD; Parvathaneni U
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2014 Jan; 88(1):106-14. PubMed ID: 24331656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An overview of methods for comparative effectiveness research.
    Meyer AM; Wheeler SB; Weinberger M; Chen RC; Carpenter WR
    Semin Radiat Oncol; 2014 Jan; 24(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 24314337
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The role of observational investigations in comparative effectiveness research.
    Marko NF; Weil RJ
    Value Health; 2010 Dec; 13(8):989-97. PubMed ID: 21138497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. It is important to note that RWD will never replace the more traditional and more robust RCT data; however, the emerging trend is to incorporate data that are more generalizable. Introduction.
    Mullins CD; Sanchez RJ
    J Manag Care Pharm; 2011; 17(9 Suppl A):S03-4. PubMed ID: 22074667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Revisiting issues, drawbacks and opportunities with observational studies in comparative effectiveness research.
    Alemayehu D; Cappelleri JC
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2013 Aug; 19(4):579-83. PubMed ID: 22128798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparative effectiveness research: opportunities in surgical oncology.
    Neuman HB; Greenberg CC
    Semin Radiat Oncol; 2014 Jan; 24(1):43-8. PubMed ID: 24314341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The methods of comparative effectiveness research.
    Sox HC; Goodman SN
    Annu Rev Public Health; 2012 Apr; 33():425-45. PubMed ID: 22224891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparative effectiveness research in oncology methodology: observational data.
    Hershman DL; Wright JD
    J Clin Oncol; 2012 Dec; 30(34):4215-22. PubMed ID: 23071228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology.
    Basch E; Abernethy AP; Mullins CD; Reeve BB; Smith ML; Coons SJ; Sloan J; Wenzel K; Chauhan C; Eppard W; Frank ES; Lipscomb J; Raymond SA; Spencer M; Tunis S
    J Clin Oncol; 2012 Dec; 30(34):4249-55. PubMed ID: 23071244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative effectiveness research in cancer with observational data.
    Giordano SH
    Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book; 2015; ():e330-5. PubMed ID: 25993193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pre-study feasibility and identifying sensitivity analyses for protocol pre-specification in comparative effectiveness research.
    Girman CJ; Faries D; Ryan P; Rotelli M; Belger M; Binkowitz B; O'Neill R;
    J Comp Eff Res; 2014 May; 3(3):259-70. PubMed ID: 24969153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Decision support tools to optimize economic outcomes for type 2 diabetes.
    Shaya FT; Chirikov VV
    Am J Manag Care; 2011 Nov; 17 Suppl 14():S377-83. PubMed ID: 22214425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Developing a system to track meaningful outcome measures in head and neck cancer treatment.
    Walters RS; Albright HW; Weber RS; Feeley TW; Hanna EY; Cantor SB; Lewis CM; Burke TW
    Head Neck; 2014 Feb; 36(2):226-30. PubMed ID: 23729280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Studies in the quality of life of head and neck cancer patients: results of a two-year longitudinal study and a comparative cross-sectional cross-cultural survey.
    Morton RP
    Laryngoscope; 2003 Jul; 113(7):1091-103. PubMed ID: 12838004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: implications for clinical practice and health care policy.
    Ahmed S; Berzon RA; Revicki DA; Lenderking WR; Moinpour CM; Basch E; Reeve BB; Wu AW;
    Med Care; 2012 Dec; 50(12):1060-70. PubMed ID: 22922434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Leveraging observational registries to inform comparative effectiveness research.
    Shah BR; Drozda J; Peterson ED
    Am Heart J; 2010 Jul; 160(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 20598966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparative effectiveness research: moving medical oncology forward.
    Hirsch BR; Zafar SY
    Semin Radiat Oncol; 2014 Jan; 24(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 24314342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Some methodological points to consider when performing systematic reviews in comparative effectiveness research.
    Berlin JA; Cepeda MS
    Clin Trials; 2012 Feb; 9(1):27-34. PubMed ID: 22049086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.