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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28236001)

  • 1. [Systematic errors in clinical studies : A comprehensive survey].
    Golder WA
    Ophthalmologe; 2017 Mar; 114(3):215-223. PubMed ID: 28236001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Systematic errors in clinical studies : A comprehensive survey].
    Golder WA
    Z Rheumatol; 2017 Feb; 76(1):71-82. PubMed ID: 28083633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
    Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. A meta-epidemiological study to examine the association between bias and treatment effects in neonatal trials.
    Bialy L; Vandermeer B; Lacaze-Masmonteil T; Dryden DM; Hartling L
    Evid Based Child Health; 2014 Dec; 9(4):1052-9. PubMed ID: 25504975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Randomized clinical trial: myths around elementary statistical principles.
    Edler L; Kopp-Schneider A
    Onkologie; 2003 Dec; 26(6):551-6. PubMed ID: 14709929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Time-dependent confounding in the estimation of treatment effects in randomised trials with multimodal therapies--an illustration of the problem of time-dependent confounding by causal graphs].
    Zietemann VD; Schuster T; Duell TH
    Gesundheitswesen; 2015 Jan; 77(1):62-6. PubMed ID: 24203687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Composite outcomes in randomized clinical trials: arguments for and against.
    Ross S
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Feb; 196(2):119.e1-6. PubMed ID: 17306647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Assessment of risk of bias in controlled studies].
    Buchberger B; von Elm E; Gartlehner G; Huppertz H; Antes G; Wasem J; Meerpohl JJ
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2014 Dec; 57(12):1432-8. PubMed ID: 25380968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Trial sequential analyses of meta-analyses of complications in laparoscopic vs. small-incision cholecystectomy: more randomized patients are needed.
    Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2010 Mar; 63(3):246-56. PubMed ID: 20004553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. DEPERROR: Risks of systematic errors in drug and non-drug randomized clinical trials assessing intervention effects in patients with unipolar depression.
    Krogh J; Hjorthøj CR; Jakobsen JC; Lindschou J; Kessing LV; Nordentoft M; Gluud C
    J Affect Disord; 2015 Jul; 179():121-7. PubMed ID: 25863907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Re-interpreting conventional interval estimates taking into account bias and extra-variation.
    Höfler M; Seaman SR
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Oct; 6():51. PubMed ID: 17042949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An evaluation of inferential procedures for adaptive clinical trial designs with pre-specified rules for modifying the sample size.
    Levin GP; Emerson SC; Emerson SS
    Biometrics; 2014 Sep; 70(3):556-67. PubMed ID: 24766094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials.
    Zhang Y; Alyass A; Vanniyasingam T; Sadeghirad B; Flórez ID; Pichika SC; Kennedy SA; Abdulkarimova U; Zhang Y; Iljon T; Morgano GP; Colunga Lozano LE; Aloweni FAB; Lopes LC; Yepes-Nuñez JJ; Fei Y; Wang L; Kahale LA; Meyre D; Akl EA; Thabane L; Guyatt GH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Aug; 88():67-80. PubMed ID: 28579378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Repeated randomization and matching in multi-arm trials.
    Xu Z; Kalbfleisch JD
    Biometrics; 2013 Dec; 69(4):949-59. PubMed ID: 24134592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Simple efficient bias corrected instrumental variable estimator for randomized trials with noncompliance.
    Chan KC
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):786-93. PubMed ID: 22484340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. On comparison of mixture models for closed population capture-recapture studies.
    Xuan Mao C; You N
    Biometrics; 2009 Jun; 65(2):547-53. PubMed ID: 18510651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of instrument error and method agreement.
    Chatburn RL
    AANA J; 1996 Jun; 64(3):261-8. PubMed ID: 9095698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sample Size and Statistical Conclusions from Tests of Fit to the Rasch Model According to the Rasch Unidimensional Measurement Model (Rumm) Program in Health Outcome Measurement.
    Hagell P; Westergren A
    J Appl Meas; 2016; 17(4):416-431. PubMed ID: 28009589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing the validity of clinical trials.
    Akobeng AK
    J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr; 2008 Sep; 47(3):277-82. PubMed ID: 18728521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.