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 *

204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28074629)

  • 21. Propensity score trimming mitigates bias due to covariate measurement error in inverse probability of treatment weighted analyses: A plasmode simulation.
    Conover MM; Rothman KJ; Stürmer T; Ellis AR; Poole C; Jonsson Funk M
    Stat Med; 2021 Apr; 40(9):2101-2112. PubMed ID: 33622016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. On variance estimation of the inverse probability-of-treatment weighting estimator: A tutorial for different types of propensity score weights.
    Kostouraki A; Hajage D; Rachet B; Williamson EJ; Chauvet G; Belot A; Leyrat C
    Stat Med; 2024 Jun; 43(13):2672-2694. PubMed ID: 38622063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Propensity score analysis methods with balancing constraints: A Monte Carlo study.
    Li Y; Li L
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Apr; 30(4):1119-1142. PubMed ID: 33525962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The performance of different propensity-score methods for estimating differences in proportions (risk differences or absolute risk reductions) in observational studies.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2010 Sep; 29(20):2137-48. PubMed ID: 20108233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Propensity score methods and regression adjustment for analysis of nonrandomized studies with health-related quality of life outcomes.
    Cottone F; Anota A; Bonnetain F; Collins GS; Efficace F
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2019 May; 28(5):690-699. PubMed ID: 30784132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A comparison of machine learning algorithms and covariate balance measures for propensity score matching and weighting.
    Cannas M; Arpino B
    Biom J; 2019 Jul; 61(4):1049-1072. PubMed ID: 31090108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Double propensity-score adjustment: A solution to design bias or bias due to incomplete matching.
    Austin PC
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Feb; 26(1):201-222. PubMed ID: 25038071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study.
    Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Anderson GM
    Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):734-53. PubMed ID: 16708349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A propensity score approach to correction for bias due to population stratification using genetic and non-genetic factors.
    Zhao H; Rebbeck TR; Mitra N
    Genet Epidemiol; 2009 Dec; 33(8):679-90. PubMed ID: 19353632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of the ability of double-robust estimators to correct bias in propensity score matching analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation study.
    Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Devereaux PJ; Daurès JP; Landais P; Le Manach Y
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2017 Dec; 26(12):1513-1519. PubMed ID: 28984050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Combining propensity score-based stratification and weighting to improve causal inference in the evaluation of health care interventions.
    Linden A
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2014 Dec; 20(6):1065-71. PubMed ID: 25266868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluating the comparability of osteoporosis treatments using propensity score and negative control outcome methods in UK and Denmark electronic health record databases.
    Tan EH; Rathod-Mistry T; Strauss VY; O'Kelly J; Giorgianni F; Baxter R; Brunetti VC; Pedersen AB; Ehrenstein V; Prieto-Alhambra D
    J Bone Miner Res; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38619297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. An evaluation of inverse probability weighting using the propensity score for baseline covariate adjustment in smaller population randomised controlled trials with a continuous outcome.
    Raad H; Cornelius V; Chan S; Williamson E; Cro S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Mar; 20(1):70. PubMed ID: 32293286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Use of propensity score and disease risk score for multiple treatments with time-to-event outcome: a simulation study.
    Zhang D; Kim J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(6):1103-1115. PubMed ID: 30831052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of Propensity Score Methods and Covariate Adjustment: Evaluation in 4 Cardiovascular Studies.
    Elze MC; Gregson J; Baber U; Williamson E; Sartori S; Mehran R; Nichols M; Stone GW; Pocock SJ
    J Am Coll Cardiol; 2017 Jan; 69(3):345-357. PubMed ID: 28104076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Propensity score methods for estimating relative risks in cluster randomized trials with low-incidence binary outcomes and selection bias.
    Leyrat C; Caille A; Donner A; Giraudeau B
    Stat Med; 2014 Sep; 33(20):3556-75. PubMed ID: 24771662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Time-dependent propensity score and collider-stratification bias: an example of beta2-agonist use and the risk of coronary heart disease.
    Sanni Ali M; Groenwold RH; Pestman WR; Belitser SV; Hoes AW; de Boer A; Klungel OH
    Eur J Epidemiol; 2013 Apr; 28(4):291-9. PubMed ID: 23354982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Unicompartmental compared with total knee replacement for patients with multimorbidities: a cohort study using propensity score stratification and inverse probability weighting.
    Prats-Uribe A; Kolovos S; Berencsi K; Carr A; Judge A; Silman A; Arden N; Petersen I; Douglas IJ; Wilkinson JM; Murray D; Valderas JM; Beard DJ; Lamb SE; Ali MS; Pinedo-Villanueva R; Strauss VY; Prieto-Alhambra D
    Health Technol Assess; 2021 Nov; 25(66):1-126. PubMed ID: 34812138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.