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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28282261)

  • 1. Evaluating different strategies for estimating treatment effects in observational studies.
    Zagar AJ; Kadziola Z; Lipkovich I; Faries DE
    J Biopharm Stat; 2017; 27(3):535-553. PubMed ID: 28282261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. On the use of propensity scores in case of rare exposure.
    Hajage D; Tubach F; Steg PG; Bhatt DL; De Rycke Y
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Mar; 16():38. PubMed ID: 27036963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. On the joint use of propensity and prognostic scores in estimation of the average treatment effect on the treated: a simulation study.
    Leacy FP; Stuart EA
    Stat Med; 2014 Sep; 33(20):3488-508. PubMed ID: 24151187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Propensity score matching and subclassification in observational studies with multi-level treatments.
    Yang S; Imbens GW; Cui Z; Faries DE; Kadziola Z
    Biometrics; 2016 Dec; 72(4):1055-1065. PubMed ID: 26991040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Propensity scores based methods for estimating average treatment effect and average treatment effect among treated: A comparative study.
    Abdia Y; Kulasekera KB; Datta S; Boakye M; Kong M
    Biom J; 2017 Sep; 59(5):967-985. PubMed ID: 28436047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Using classification tree analysis to generate propensity score weights.
    Linden A; Yarnold PR
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2017 Aug; 23(4):703-712. PubMed ID: 28371206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Comparison of balancing scores using the ANCOVA approach for estimating average treatment effect: a simulation study.
    Tu C; Koh WY
    J Biopharm Stat; 2019; 29(3):508-515. PubMed ID: 30561245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. On variance estimate for covariate adjustment by propensity score analysis.
    Zou B; Zou F; Shuster JJ; Tighe PJ; Koch GG; Zhou H
    Stat Med; 2016 Sep; 35(20):3537-48. PubMed ID: 26999553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Use and Interpretation of Propensity Scores in Aging Research: A Guide for Clinical Researchers.
    Kim DH; Pieper CF; Ahmed A; Colón-Emeric CS
    J Am Geriatr Soc; 2016 Oct; 64(10):2065-2073. PubMed ID: 27550392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A weighting analogue to pair matching in propensity score analysis.
    Li L; Greene T
    Int J Biostat; 2013 Jul; 9(2):215-34. PubMed ID: 23902694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. A comparison of two methods of estimating propensity scores after multiple imputation.
    Mitra R; Reiter JP
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2016 Feb; 25(1):188-204. PubMed ID: 22687877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluating the performance of propensity score matching based approaches in individual patient data meta-analysis.
    Johara FT; Benedetti A; Platt R; Menzies D; Viiklepp P; Schaaf S; Chan E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Nov; 21(1):257. PubMed ID: 34814845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A new weighted balance measure helped to select the variables to be included in a propensity score model.
    Caruana E; Chevret S; Resche-Rigon M; Pirracchio R
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Dec; 68(12):1415-22.e2. PubMed ID: 26050059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Estimating causal effects for survival (time-to-event) outcomes by combining classification tree analysis and propensity score weighting.
    Linden A; Yarnold PR
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2018 Apr; 24(2):380-387. PubMed ID: 29230910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.