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 *

205 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25887045)

  • 1. Preference-adaptive randomization in comparative effectiveness studies.
    French B; Small DS; Novak J; Saulsgiver KA; Harhay MO; Asch DA; Volpp KG; Halpern SD
    Trials; 2015 Mar; 16():99. PubMed ID: 25887045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A simulation study for comparing testing statistics in response-adaptive randomization.
    Gu X; Lee JJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2010 Jun; 10():48. PubMed ID: 20525382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Preference option randomized design (PORD) for comparative effectiveness research: Statistical power for testing comparative effect, preference effect, selection effect, intent-to-treat effect, and overall effect.
    Heo M; Meissner P; Litwin AH; Arnsten JH; McKee MD; Karasz A; McKinley P; Rehm CD; Chambers EC; Yeh MC; Wylie-Rosett J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Feb; 28(2):626-640. PubMed ID: 29121828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Randomization in substance abuse clinical trials.
    Hedden SL; Woolson RF; Malcolm RJ
    Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy; 2006 Feb; 1():6. PubMed ID: 16722591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Bayesian comparative effectiveness trial in action: developing a platform for multisite study adaptive randomization.
    Brown AR; Gajewski BJ; Aaronson LS; Mudaranthakam DP; Hunt SL; Berry SM; Quintana M; Pasnoor M; Dimachkie MM; Jawdat O; Herbelin L; Barohn RJ
    Trials; 2016 Aug; 17(1):428. PubMed ID: 27577191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of dynamic block randomization and minimization in randomized trials: a simulation study.
    Xiao L; Lavori PW; Wilson SR; Ma J
    Clin Trials; 2011 Feb; 8(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 21335590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A simulation study of outcome adaptive randomization in multi-arm clinical trials.
    Wathen JK; Thall PF
    Clin Trials; 2017 Oct; 14(5):432-440. PubMed ID: 28982263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Statistical controversies in clinical research: scientific and ethical problems with adaptive randomization in comparative clinical trials.
    Thall P; Fox P; Wathen J
    Ann Oncol; 2015 Aug; 26(8):1621-8. PubMed ID: 25979922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Balanced covariates with response adaptive randomization.
    Saville BR; Berry SM
    Pharm Stat; 2017 May; 16(3):210-217. PubMed ID: 28261972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of response adaptive randomization features in multiarm clinical trials with control.
    Viele K; Saville BR; McGlothlin A; Broglio K
    Pharm Stat; 2020 Sep; 19(5):602-612. PubMed ID: 32198968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A group sequential, response-adaptive design for randomized clinical trials.
    Karrison TG; Huo D; Chappell R
    Control Clin Trials; 2003 Oct; 24(5):506-22. PubMed ID: 14500050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Simulation of various randomization strategies for a clinical trial in sickle cell disease.
    Meurer WJ; Connor JT; Glassberg J
    Hematology; 2016 May; 21(4):241-7. PubMed ID: 26868369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long-acting reversible contraceptive acceptability and unintended pregnancy among women presenting for short-acting methods: a randomized patient preference trial.
    Hubacher D; Spector H; Monteith C; Chen PL; Hart C
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 216(2):101-109. PubMed ID: 27662799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Blocked randomization with randomly selected block sizes.
    Efird J
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2011 Jan; 8(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 21318011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Response-adaptive randomization for clinical trials with adjustment for covariate imbalance.
    Ning J; Huang X
    Stat Med; 2010 Jul; 29(17):1761-8. PubMed ID: 20658546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Ethical pitfalls in neonatal comparative effectiveness trials.
    Modi N
    Neonatology; 2014; 105(4):350-1. PubMed ID: 24931328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of methods for control allocation in multiple arm studies using response adaptive randomization.
    Viele K; Broglio K; McGlothlin A; Saville BR
    Clin Trials; 2020 Feb; 17(1):52-60. PubMed ID: 31630567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Adaptive adjustment of the randomization ratio using historical control data.
    Hobbs BP; Carlin BP; Sargent DJ
    Clin Trials; 2013; 10(3):430-40. PubMed ID: 23690095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Balancing Contamination and Referral Bias in a Randomized Clinical Trial: An Application of Pseudo-Cluster Randomization.
    Pence BW; Gaynes BN; Thielman NM; Heine A; Mugavero MJ; Turner EL; Quinlivan EB
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 182(12):1039-46. PubMed ID: 26628511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Choosing an imbalance metric for covariate-constrained randomization in multiple-arm cluster-randomized trials.
    Ciolino JD; Diebold A; Jensen JK; Rouleau GW; Koloms KK; Tandon D
    Trials; 2019 May; 20(1):293. PubMed ID: 31138319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.