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.
97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26059610)
21. [How to prepare for a biometric consultation?]. König IR; Weitz G Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2014 Nov; 139(46):2354-6. PubMed ID: 25157985 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Sample size calculations based on slopes and other summary statistics. Dawson JD Biometrics; 1998 Mar; 54(1):323-30. PubMed ID: 9544525 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Exact confidence intervals following a group sequential test. Tsiatis AA; Rosner GL; Mehta CR Biometrics; 1984 Sep; 40(3):797-803. PubMed ID: 6518248 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A multiple-step selection procedure with sequential protection of preferred treatments. Chen TT; Simon R Biometrics; 1993 Sep; 49(3):753-61. PubMed ID: 8241371 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Change-over clinical trial with binary data: mixed-model-based comparison of tests. Fidler V Biometrics; 1984 Dec; 40(4):1063-70. PubMed ID: 6534409 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A comment on interim analyses in crossover trials. Grieve AP; Senn S Biometrics; 1996 Dec; 52(4):1515-20. PubMed ID: 9019232 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Repeated measures in clinical trials: analysis using mean summary statistics and its implications for design by L. Frison and S.J. Pocock, Statistics in Medicine 1992; 12: 1685-1704. Julious SA Stat Med; 2000 Nov; 19(22):3133-5. PubMed ID: 11113948 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Stratified exact tests for the weak causal null hypothesis in randomized trials with a binary outcome. Chiba Y Biom J; 2017 Sep; 59(5):986-997. PubMed ID: 28605047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. An improved uniformly more powerful exact Fisher-Hayter pairwise comparisons procedure. Wang B; Cui X Biom J; 2017 Jul; 59(4):767-775. PubMed ID: 28436123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Minimize the use of minimization with unequal allocation. Proschan M; Brittain E; Kammerman L Biometrics; 2011 Sep; 67(3):1135-41. PubMed ID: 21281276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Testing differences in proportions. Fisher MJ; Marshall AP; Mitchell M Aust Crit Care; 2011 May; 24(2):133-8. PubMed ID: 21536451 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. From protocol to published report: a study of consistency in the reporting of academic drug trials. Berendt L; Callréus T; Petersen LG; Bach KF; Poulsen HE; Dalhoff K Trials; 2016 Feb; 17():100. PubMed ID: 26895826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Treatment allocation for nonlinear models in clinical trials: the logistic model. Begg CB; Kalish LA Biometrics; 1984 Jun; 40(2):409-20. PubMed ID: 6487725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Optimal Bayesian design for patient selection in a clinical study. Buzoianu M; Kadane JB Biometrics; 2009 Sep; 65(3):953-61. PubMed ID: 19021600 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Fisher's inexact test: probability too serious to be left to statisticians. Cormack RS JAMA; 1989 Dec; 262(22):3129. PubMed ID: 2810664 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. O'Brien PC Biometrics; 1984 Dec; 40(4):1079-87. PubMed ID: 6534410 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Factorial designs for randomized clinical trials. Byar DP; Piantadosi S Cancer Treat Rep; 1985 Oct; 69(10):1055-63. PubMed ID: 4042085 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]