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: 2723692)

  • 1. Performance of tests of significance based on stratification by a multivariate confounder score or by a propensity score.
    Cook EF; Goldman L
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1989; 42(4):317-24. PubMed ID: 2723692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders.
    Cepeda MS; Boston R; Farrar JT; Strom BL
    Am J Epidemiol; 2003 Aug; 158(3):280-7. PubMed ID: 12882951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Asymmetric stratification. An outline for an efficient method for controlling confounding in cohort studies.
    Cook EF; Goldman L
    Am J Epidemiol; 1988 Mar; 127(3):626-39. PubMed ID: 3341363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Weaknesses of goodness-of-fit tests for evaluating propensity score models: the case of the omitted confounder.
    Weitzen S; Lapane KL; Toledano AY; Hume AL; Mor V
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2005 Apr; 14(4):227-38. PubMed ID: 15386700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Confounder-adjusted estimates of the risk difference using propensity score-based weighting.
    Ukoumunne OC; Williamson E; Forbes AB; Gulliford MC; Carlin JB
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(30):3126-36. PubMed ID: 21170907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of propensity scores, disease risk scores, and regression in confounder adjustment for the safety of emerging treatment with group sequential monitoring.
    Xu S; Shetterly S; Cook AJ; Raebel MA; Goonesekera S; Shoaibi A; Roy J; Fireman B
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2016 Apr; 25(4):453-61. PubMed ID: 26875591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Marginal Structural Models for Risk or Prevalence Ratios for a Point Exposure Using a Disease Risk Score.
    Richardson DB; Keil AP; Kinlaw AC; Cole SR
    Am J Epidemiol; 2019 May; 188(5):960-966. PubMed ID: 30726868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Performance of disease risk scores, propensity scores, and traditional multivariable outcome regression in the presence of multiple confounders.
    Arbogast PG; Ray WA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2011 Sep; 174(5):613-20. PubMed ID: 21749976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Some insights into Miettinen's multivariate confounder score approach to case-control study analysis.
    Pike MC; Anderson J; Day N
    Epidemiol Community Health; 1979 Mar; 33(1):104-6. PubMed ID: 467396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Magnitude and direction of missing confounders had different consequences on treatment effect estimation in propensity score analysis.
    Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Fontaine C; Daurès JP; Devereaux PJ; Landais P; Le Manach Y
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Jul; 87():87-97. PubMed ID: 28412467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. A Propensity-score-based Fine Stratification Approach for Confounding Adjustment When Exposure Is Infrequent.
    Desai RJ; Rothman KJ; Bateman BT; Hernandez-Diaz S; Huybrechts KF
    Epidemiology; 2017 Mar; 28(2):249-257. PubMed ID: 27922533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Identification of confounder in epidemiologic data contaminated by measurement error in covariates.
    Lee PH; Burstyn I
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 May; 16():54. PubMed ID: 27193095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Which Propensity Score Method Best Reduces Confounder Imbalance? An Example From a Retrospective Evaluation of a Childhood Obesity Intervention.
    Schroeder K; Jia H; Smaldone A
    Nurs Res; 2016; 65(6):465-474. PubMed ID: 27801717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Propensity scores in observational research].
    Groenwold RH
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2013; 157(29):A6179. PubMed ID: 23859107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Identifiability, exchangeability, and epidemiological confounding.
    Greenland S; Robins JM
    Int J Epidemiol; 1986 Sep; 15(3):413-9. PubMed ID: 3771081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Improving causal inference with a doubly robust estimator that combines propensity score stratification and weighting.
    Linden A
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Aug; 23(4):697-702. PubMed ID: 28116816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Causal inference with a quantitative exposure.
    Zhang Z; Zhou J; Cao W; Zhang J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Feb; 25(1):315-35. PubMed ID: 22729475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study.
    Lunceford JK; Davidian M
    Stat Med; 2004 Oct; 23(19):2937-60. PubMed ID: 15351954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Stratification by a multivariate confounder score.
    Miettinen OS
    Am J Epidemiol; 1976 Dec; 104(6):609-20. PubMed ID: 998608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.