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 *

84 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26750710)

  • 1. A Comparison of Bias and Mean Squared Error in Parameter Estimates of Interaction Effects: Moderated Multiple Regression versus Error-in-Variables Regression.
    Anderson LE; Stone-Romero EF; Tisak J
    Multivariate Behav Res; 1996 Jan; 31(1):69-94. PubMed ID: 26750710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The impact of ignoring random features of predictor and moderator variables on sample size for precise interval estimation of interaction effects.
    Shieh G
    Behav Res Methods; 2011 Dec; 43(4):1075-84. PubMed ID: 21553176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sample size determination for confidence intervals of interaction effects in moderated multiple regression with continuous predictor and moderator variables.
    Shieh G
    Behav Res Methods; 2010 Aug; 42(3):824-35. PubMed ID: 20805605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Detection of interactions between a dichotomous moderator and a continuous predictor in moderated multiple regression with heterogeneous error variance.
    Shieh G
    Behav Res Methods; 2009 Feb; 41(1):61-74. PubMed ID: 19182125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bias correction by use of errors-in-variables regression models in studies with K-X-ray fluorescence bone lead measurements.
    Lamadrid-Figueroa H; Téllez-Rojo MM; Angeles G; Hernández-Ávila M; Hu H
    Environ Res; 2011 Jan; 111(1):17-20. PubMed ID: 21092947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Some cautions on the use of instrumental variables estimators in outcomes research: how bias in instrumental variables estimators is affected by instrument strength, instrument contamination, and sample size.
    Crown WH; Henk HJ; Vanness DJ
    Value Health; 2011 Dec; 14(8):1078-84. PubMed ID: 22152177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of regression calibration and SIMEX methods in logistic regression when one of the predictors is subject to additive measurement error.
    Fung KY; Krewski D
    J Epidemiol Biostat; 1999; 4(2):65-74. PubMed ID: 10619053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Correlated measurement error--implications for nutritional epidemiology.
    Day NE; Wong MY; Bingham S; Khaw KT; Luben R; Michels KB; Welch A; Wareham NJ
    Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Dec; 33(6):1373-81. PubMed ID: 15333617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. On the Misconception of Multicollinearity in Detection of Moderating Effects: Multicollinearity Is Not Always Detrimental.
    Shieh G
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2010 May; 45(3):483-507. PubMed ID: 26760490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Modified Liu estimators in the linear regression model: An application to Tobacco data.
    Babar I; Ayed H; Chand S; Suhail M; Khan YA; Marzouki R
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(11):e0259991. PubMed ID: 34807916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Investigating bias in squared regression structure coefficients.
    Nimon KF; Zientek LR; Thompson B
    Front Psychol; 2015; 6():949. PubMed ID: 26217273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of methods to handle skew distributed cost variables in the analysis of the resource consumption in schizophrenia treatment.
    Kilian R; Matschinger H; Löeffler W; Roick C; Angermeyer MC
    J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2002 Mar; 5(1):21-31. PubMed ID: 12529567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of sample size and bias on the reliability of estimates of error: a comparative study of Dahlberg's formula.
    Springate SD
    Eur J Orthod; 2012 Apr; 34(2):158-63. PubMed ID: 21447784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Moderation analysis using a two-level regression model.
    Yuan KH; Cheng Y; Maxwell S
    Psychometrika; 2014 Oct; 79(4):701-32. PubMed ID: 24337935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Applications of multiple imputation to the analysis of censored regression data.
    Wei GC; Tanner MA
    Biometrics; 1991 Dec; 47(4):1297-309. PubMed ID: 1786320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On mean-sigma estimators and bias.
    Baldwin P
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 May; 66(2):277-89. PubMed ID: 22571589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact of mis-specification of the treatment model on estimates from a marginal structural model.
    Lefebvre G; Delaney JA; Platt RW
    Stat Med; 2008 Aug; 27(18):3629-42. PubMed ID: 18254127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The impact of ignoring measurement error when estimating sample size for epidemiologic studies.
    Devine O
    Eval Health Prof; 2003 Sep; 26(3):315-39. PubMed ID: 12971202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Revisiting a statistical shortcoming when fitting the Langmuir model to sorption data.
    Bolster CH
    J Environ Qual; 2008; 37(5):1986-92. PubMed ID: 18689760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing measurement error correction methods for rate-of-change exposure variables in survival analysis.
    Veronesi G; Ferrario MM; Chambless LE
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2013 Dec; 22(6):583-97. PubMed ID: 21300627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.