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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26239405)

  • 1. Incorporating the sampling design in weighting adjustments for panel attrition.
    Chen Q; Gelman A; Tracy M; Norris FH; Galea S
    Stat Med; 2015 Dec; 34(28):3637-47. PubMed ID: 26239405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. On modelling response propensity for dwelling unit (DU) level non-response adjustment in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS).
    Wun LM; Ezzati-Rice TM; Diaz-Tena N; Greenblatt J
    Stat Med; 2007 Apr; 26(8):1875-84. PubMed ID: 17206601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The use of sampling weights for survey data analysis.
    Pfeffermann D
    Stat Methods Med Res; 1996 Sep; 5(3):239-61. PubMed ID: 8931195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Weighting regressions by propensity scores.
    Freedman DA; Berk RA
    Eval Rev; 2008 Aug; 32(4):392-409. PubMed ID: 18591709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An evaluation of whether propensity score adjustment can remove the self-selection bias inherent to web panel surveys addressing sensitive health behaviours.
    Copas A; Burkill S; Conrad F; Couper MP; Erens B
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Oct; 20(1):251. PubMed ID: 33032535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An empirical evaluation of alternative approaches to adjusting for attrition when analyzing longitudinal survey data on young adults' substance use trajectories.
    Si Y; West BT; Veliz P; Patrick ME; Schulenberg JE; Kloska DD; Terry-McElrath YM; McCabe SE
    Int J Methods Psychiatr Res; 2022 Sep; 31(3):e1916. PubMed ID: 35582963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An Evaluation of Weighting Methods Based on Propensity Scores to Reduce Selection Bias in Multilevel Observational Studies.
    Leite WL; Jimenez F; Kaya Y; Stapleton LM; MacInnes JW; Sandbach R
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2015; 50(3):265-84. PubMed ID: 26610029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bias through selective inclusion and attrition: Representativeness when comparing provider performance with routine outcome monitoring data.
    de Beurs E; Warmerdam L; Twisk J
    Clin Psychol Psychother; 2019 Jul; 26(4):430-439. PubMed ID: 30882974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Nonresponse Bias in Estimates From the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.
    Hing E; Shimizu IM; Talwalkar A
    Vital Health Stat 2; 2016 Feb; (171):1-42. PubMed ID: 27301078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.
    West BT; McCabe SE
    Am J Epidemiol; 2017 Apr; 185(7):591-600. PubMed ID: 28338839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Marginal mean weighting through stratification: a generalized method for evaluating multivalued and multiple treatments with nonexperimental data.
    Hong G
    Psychol Methods; 2012 Mar; 17(1):44-60. PubMed ID: 21843003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Calibration Weighting Methods for the National Center for Health Statistics Research and Development Survey.
    Irimata KE; He Y; Parsons VL; Shin HC; Zhang G
    Vital Health Stat 2; 2023 Mar; (199):1-23. PubMed ID: 36940133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessment of weighting methodology for the National Comorbidity Survey.
    Little RJ; Lewitzky S; Heeringa S; Lepkowski J; Kessler RC
    Am J Epidemiol; 1997 Sep; 146(5):439-49. PubMed ID: 9290504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluating assumptions of weighting class methods for partial response using a selection model.
    Smith PJ; Marsh LC
    Stat Med; 2008 Sep; 27(22):4569-80. PubMed ID: 18613216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Occupancy modeling species-environment relationships with non-ignorable survey designs.
    Irvine KM; Rodhouse TJ; Wright WJ; Olsen AR
    Ecol Appl; 2018 Sep; 28(6):1616-1625. PubMed ID: 29802750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The performance of sample selection estimators to control for attrition bias.
    Grasdal A
    Health Econ; 2001 Jul; 10(5):385-98. PubMed ID: 11466801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. National Survey of Family Growth, Cycle 6: sample design, weighting, imputation, and variance estimation.
    Lepkowski JM; Mosher WD; Davis KE; Groves RM; van Hoewyk J; Willem J
    Vital Health Stat 2; 2006 Jul; (142):1-82. PubMed ID: 16999003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies.
    Hogan JW; Lancaster T
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2004 Feb; 13(1):17-48. PubMed ID: 14746439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cross-linked survey analysis is an approach for separating cause and effect in survey research.
    Redelmeier DA; Thiruchelvam D; Lustig AJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jan; 68(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 25306395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.