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 *

265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28273693)

  • 1. Outcome-adaptive lasso: Variable selection for causal inference.
    Shortreed SM; Ertefaie A
    Biometrics; 2017 Dec; 73(4):1111-1122. PubMed ID: 28273693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reader reaction to "Outcome-adaptive lasso: Variable selection for causal inference" by Shortreed and Ertefaie (2017).
    Baldé I; Yang YA; Lefebvre G
    Biometrics; 2023 Mar; 79(1):514-520. PubMed ID: 35642320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variable selection for causal mediation analysis using LASSO-based methods.
    Ye Z; Zhu Y; Coffman DL
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Jun; 30(6):1413-1427. PubMed ID: 33755518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. High-dimensional generalized propensity score with application to omics data.
    Gao Q; Zhang Y; Liang J; Sun H; Wang T
    Brief Bioinform; 2021 Nov; 22(6):. PubMed ID: 34410351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Collaborative-controlled LASSO for constructing propensity score-based estimators in high-dimensional data.
    Ju C; Wyss R; Franklin JM; Schneeweiss S; Häggström J; van der Laan MJ
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Apr; 28(4):1044-1063. PubMed ID: 29226777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Propensity score specification for optimal estimation of average treatment effect with binary response.
    Craycroft JA; Huang J; Kong M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Dec; 29(12):3623-3640. PubMed ID: 32640934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Robust inference on the average treatment effect using the outcome highly adaptive lasso.
    Ju C; Benkeser D; van der Laan MJ
    Biometrics; 2020 Mar; 76(1):109-118. PubMed ID: 31350906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of propensity score methods for causal inference with high-dimensional covariates.
    Gao Q; Zhang Y; Sun H; Wang T
    Brief Bioinform; 2022 Jul; 23(4):. PubMed ID: 35667004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Propensity Score-Based Estimators With Multiple Error-Prone Covariates.
    Hong H; Aaby DA; Siddique J; Stuart EA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2019 Jan; 188(1):222-230. PubMed ID: 30358801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Confounder selection strategies targeting stable treatment effect estimators.
    Loh WW; Vansteelandt S
    Stat Med; 2021 Feb; 40(3):607-630. PubMed ID: 33150645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Doubly robust matching estimators for high dimensional confounding adjustment.
    Antonelli J; Cefalu M; Palmer N; Agniel D
    Biometrics; 2018 Dec; 74(4):1171-1179. PubMed ID: 29750844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Case Study of the Impact of Data-Adaptive Versus Model-Based Estimation of the Propensity Scores on Causal Inferences from Three Inverse Probability Weighting Estimators.
    Neugebauer R; Schmittdiel JA; van der Laan MJ
    Int J Biostat; 2016 May; 12(1):131-55. PubMed ID: 27227720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Covariate selection with group lasso and doubly robust estimation of causal effects.
    Koch B; Vock DM; Wolfson J
    Biometrics; 2018 Mar; 74(1):8-17. PubMed ID: 28636276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variable selection for propensity score models when estimating treatment effects on multiple outcomes: a simulation study.
    Wyss R; Girman CJ; LoCasale RJ; Brookhart AM; Stürmer T
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2013 Jan; 22(1):77-85. PubMed ID: 23070806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Targeted estimation of nuisance parameters to obtain valid statistical inference.
    van der Laan MJ
    Int J Biostat; 2014; 10(1):29-57. PubMed ID: 24516006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Estimating average treatment effects with a double-index propensity score.
    Cheng D; Chakrabortty A; Ananthakrishnan AN; Cai T
    Biometrics; 2020 Sep; 76(3):767-777. PubMed ID: 31797368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of methods for handling covariate missingness in propensity score estimation with a binary exposure.
    Coffman DL; Zhou J; Cai X
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Jun; 20(1):168. PubMed ID: 32586271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Ultra-high dimensional variable selection for doubly robust causal inference.
    Tang D; Kong D; Pan W; Wang L
    Biometrics; 2023 Jun; 79(2):903-914. PubMed ID: 35043393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.