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 *

75 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26089958)

  • 1. Estimation of Sensitive Proportion by Randomized Response Data in Successive Sampling.
    Yu B; Jin Z; Tian J; Gao G
    Comput Math Methods Med; 2015; 2015():172918. PubMed ID: 26089958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Parameter Estimation in Stratified Cluster Sampling under Randomized Response Models for Sensitive Question Survey.
    Pu X; Gao G; Fan Y; Wang M
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(2):e0148267. PubMed ID: 26886857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Poisson and negative binomial item count techniques for surveys with sensitive question.
    Tian GL; Tang ML; Wu Q; Liu Y
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Apr; 26(2):931-947. PubMed ID: 25519889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Flexible non-randomized response models for survey with sensitive question.
    Wu Q; Tang ML
    Stat Med; 2014 Mar; 33(6):918-29. PubMed ID: 24123138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ranked set sampling for efficient estimation of a population proportion.
    Chen H; Stasny EA; Wolfe DA
    Stat Med; 2005 Nov; 24(21):3319-29. PubMed ID: 16100735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A Statistical Approach to Provide Individualized Privacy for Surveys.
    Esponda F; Huerta K; Guerrero VM
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(1):e0147314. PubMed ID: 26824758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detectability in conventional and adaptive sampling.
    Thompson SK; Seber GA
    Biometrics; 1994 Sep; 50(3):712-24. PubMed ID: 7981397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Weighted estimation methods for multistage sampling survey data].
    Hou XY; Wei YY; Chen F
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2009 Jun; 30(6):633-6. PubMed ID: 19957636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Asking semi-literate adolescents about sexual behaviour: the validity of assisted self-completion questionnaire (ASCQ) data in rural Tanzania.
    Plummer ML; Wight D; Ross DA; Balira R; Anemona A; Todd J; Salamba Z; Obasi AI; Grosskurth H; Changalunga J; Hayes RJ
    Trop Med Int Health; 2004 Jun; 9(6):737-54. PubMed ID: 15189466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. On weighting the rates in non-response weights.
    Little RJ; Vartivarian S
    Stat Med; 2003 May; 22(9):1589-99. PubMed ID: 12704617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of survey techniques on sensitive sexual behavior in Italy.
    Caltabiano M; Dalla-Zuanna G
    J Sex Res; 2013; 50(6):537-47. PubMed ID: 22816489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sensitive proportion in ranked set sampling.
    Abbasi AM; Shad MY
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(8):e0256699. PubMed ID: 34464414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Interval estimation of binomial proportion in clinical trials with a two-stage design.
    Tsai WY; Chi Y; Chen CM
    Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(1):15-35. PubMed ID: 17566141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Unbalanced ranked set sampling for estimating a population proportion.
    Chen H; Stasny EA; Wolfe DA
    Biometrics; 2006 Mar; 62(1):150-8. PubMed ID: 16542241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Temporal aggregation bias and inference of causal regulatory networks.
    Bay SD; Chrisman L; Pohorille A; Shrager J
    J Comput Biol; 2004; 11(5):971-85. PubMed ID: 15700412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Misspecification tests for binomial and beta-binomial models.
    Capanu M; Presnell B
    Stat Med; 2008 Jun; 27(14):2536-54. PubMed ID: 17914713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Diagnostic test accuracy and prevalence inferences based on joint and sequential testing with finite population sampling.
    Su CL; Gardner IA; Johnson WO
    Stat Med; 2004 Jul; 23(14):2237-55. PubMed ID: 15236428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessment of coverage rates and bias using double sampling methodology.
    Jenkins P; Scheim C; Wang JT; Reed R; Green A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Feb; 57(2):123-30. PubMed ID: 15125621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Detecting nonadherence without loss in efficiency: A simple extension of the crosswise model.
    Heck DW; Hoffmann A; Moshagen M
    Behav Res Methods; 2018 Oct; 50(5):1895-1905. PubMed ID: 28916924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Estimation methods in a sampling survey].
    Warszawski J; Lellouch J
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 1997 Apr; 45(2):150-68. PubMed ID: 9221444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.