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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27189330)

  • 21. Case-base methods for studying vaccination safety.
    Saarela O; Hanley JA
    Biometrics; 2015 Mar; 71(1):42-52. PubMed ID: 25223544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Inverse probability weighting in nested case-control studies with additional matching--a simulation study.
    Støer NC; Samuelsen SO
    Stat Med; 2013 Dec; 32(30):5328-39. PubMed ID: 24132909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Standardizing Discrete-Time Hazard Ratios With a Disease Risk Score.
    Richardson DB; Keil AP; Edwards JK; Kinlaw AC; Cole SR
    Am J Epidemiol; 2020 Oct; 189(10):1197-1203. PubMed ID: 32347298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A simulation study on matched case-control designs in the perspective of causal diagrams.
    Li H; Yuan Z; Su P; Wang T; Yu Y; Sun X; Xue F
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Aug; 16(1):102. PubMed ID: 27543263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Nested case-control studies: should one break the matching?
    Borgan Ø; Keogh R
    Lifetime Data Anal; 2015 Oct; 21(4):517-41. PubMed ID: 25608704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sampling strategies in nested case-control studies.
    Langholz B; Clayton D
    Environ Health Perspect; 1994 Nov; 102 Suppl 8(Suppl 8):47-51. PubMed ID: 7851330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Studies with many covariates and few outcomes: selecting covariates and implementing propensity-score-based confounding adjustments.
    Patorno E; Glynn RJ; Hernández-Díaz S; Liu J; Schneeweiss S
    Epidemiology; 2014 Mar; 25(2):268-78. PubMed ID: 24487209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Flexible matching strategies to increase power and efficiency to detect and estimate gene-environment interactions in case-control studies.
    Stürmer T; Brenner H
    Am J Epidemiol; 2002 Apr; 155(7):593-602. PubMed ID: 11914186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Improving propensity score estimators' robustness to model misspecification using super learner.
    Pirracchio R; Petersen ML; van der Laan M
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Jan; 181(2):108-19. PubMed ID: 25515168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Alternative analytic and matching approaches for the prevalent new-user design: A simulation study.
    Webster-Clark M; Mavros P; Garry EM; Stürmer T; Shmuel S; Young J; Girman C
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2022 Jul; 31(7):796-803. PubMed ID: 35505471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Ignoring the matching variables in cohort studies - when is it valid and why?
    Sjölander A; Greenland S
    Stat Med; 2013 Nov; 32(27):4696-708. PubMed ID: 23761197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A comparison of different matching designs in case-control studies: an empirical example using continuous exposures, continuous confounders and incidence of myocardial infarction.
    Friedlander Y; Merom DL; Kark JD
    Stat Med; 1993 Jun; 12(11):993-1004. PubMed ID: 8341869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Regularized Regression Versus the High-Dimensional Propensity Score for Confounding Adjustment in Secondary Database Analyses.
    Franklin JM; Eddings W; Glynn RJ; Schneeweiss S
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Oct; 182(7):651-9. PubMed ID: 26233956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Longitudinal studies 4: Matching strategies to evaluate risk.
    James MT
    Methods Mol Biol; 2015; 1281():133-43. PubMed ID: 25694307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effects of Omitting Non-confounding Predictors From General Relative-Risk Models for Binary Outcomes.
    Cologne J; Furukawa K; Grant EJ; Abbott RD
    J Epidemiol; 2019 Mar; 29(3):116-122. PubMed ID: 30101814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Implications of M bias in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study.
    Liu W; Brookhart MA; Schneeweiss S; Mi X; Setoguchi S
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Nov; 176(10):938-48. PubMed ID: 23100247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Analysis of matched case-control data with incomplete strata: applying longitudinal approaches.
    Lin IF; Lai MY; Chuang PH
    Epidemiology; 2007 Jul; 18(4):446-52. PubMed ID: 17525695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Double-adjustment in propensity score matching analysis: choosing a threshold for considering residual imbalance.
    Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Daurès JP; Devereaux PJ; Landais P; Le Manach Y
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Apr; 17(1):78. PubMed ID: 28454568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Estimating risks for matching factors in case-control studies.
    Siskind V; Kelly JP; Kaufman DW
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2000 Mar; 53(3):251-6. PubMed ID: 10760634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Confounder summary scores when comparing the effects of multiple drug exposures.
    Cadarette SM; Gagne JJ; Solomon DH; Katz JN; Stürmer T
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2010 Jan; 19(1):2-9. PubMed ID: 19757416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.