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 *

553 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28208229)

  • 1. Comparing the performance of propensity score methods in healthcare database studies with rare outcomes.
    Franklin JM; Eddings W; Austin PC; Stuart EA; Schneeweiss S
    Stat Med; 2017 May; 36(12):1946-1963. PubMed ID: 28208229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Variable Selection for Confounding Adjustment in High-dimensional Covariate Spaces When Analyzing Healthcare Databases.
    Schneeweiss S; Eddings W; Glynn RJ; Patorno E; Rassen J; Franklin JM
    Epidemiology; 2017 Mar; 28(2):237-248. PubMed ID: 27779497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Using Super Learner Prediction Modeling to Improve High-dimensional Propensity Score Estimation.
    Wyss R; Schneeweiss S; van der Laan M; Lendle SD; Ju C; Franklin JM
    Epidemiology; 2018 Jan; 29(1):96-106. PubMed ID: 28991001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Should a propensity score model be super? The utility of ensemble procedures for causal adjustment.
    Alam S; Moodie EEM; Stephens DA
    Stat Med; 2019 Apr; 38(9):1690-1702. PubMed ID: 30586681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Adjusting for Confounding in Early Postlaunch Settings: Going Beyond Logistic Regression Models.
    Schmidt AF; Klungel OH; Groenwold RH;
    Epidemiology; 2016 Jan; 27(1):133-42. PubMed ID: 26436519
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The performance of inverse probability of treatment weighting and full matching on the propensity score in the presence of model misspecification when estimating the effect of treatment on survival outcomes.
    Austin PC; Stuart EA
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Aug; 26(4):1654-1670. PubMed ID: 25934643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Comparing methods for estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects using observational data from health care databases.
    Wendling T; Jung K; Callahan A; Schuler A; Shah NH; Gallego B
    Stat Med; 2018 Oct; 37(23):3309-3324. PubMed ID: 29862536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Performance evaluation of regression splines for propensity score adjustment in post-market safety analysis with multiple treatments.
    Tian Y; Baro E; Zhang R
    J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(5):810-821. PubMed ID: 31502924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Propensity score weighting under limited overlap and model misspecification.
    Zhou Y; Matsouaka RA; Thomas L
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Dec; 29(12):3721-3756. PubMed ID: 32693715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Estimating the effect of treatment on binary outcomes using full matching on the propensity score.
    Austin PC; Stuart EA
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Dec; 26(6):2505-2525. PubMed ID: 26329750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Model misspecification and robustness in causal inference: comparing matching with doubly robust estimation.
    Waernbaum I
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(15):1572-81. PubMed ID: 22359267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Weighted estimation for confounded binary outcomes subject to misclassification.
    Gravel CA; Platt RW
    Stat Med; 2018 Feb; 37(3):425-436. PubMed ID: 29082530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. High-dimensional propensity score algorithm in comparative effectiveness research with time-varying interventions.
    Neugebauer R; Schmittdiel JA; Zhu Z; Rassen JA; Seeger JD; Schneeweiss S
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(5):753-81. PubMed ID: 25488047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Estimation of causal effects of multiple treatments in observational studies with a binary outcome.
    Hu L; Gu C; Lopez M; Ji J; Wisnivesky J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Nov; 29(11):3218-3234. PubMed ID: 32450775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Estimators and confidence intervals for the marginal odds ratio using logistic regression and propensity score stratification.
    Stampf S; Graf E; Schmoor C; Schumacher M
    Stat Med; 2010 Mar; 29(7-8):760-9. PubMed ID: 20213703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 28.