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 *

278 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28847037)

  • 1. Is Propensity Score Analysis a Valid Surrogate of Randomization for the Avoidance of Allocation Bias?
    Torres F; Ríos J; Saez-Peñataro J; Pontes C
    Semin Liver Dis; 2017 Aug; 37(3):275-286. PubMed ID: 28847037
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Response to comments on 'the use of propensity scores and observational data to estimate randomized controlled trial generalizability bias'.
    Kaizar EE; Vydra TP
    Stat Med; 2014 Feb; 33(3):538-9. PubMed ID: 24395075
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comments on 'the use of propensity scores and observational data to estimate randomized controlled trial generalizability bias' by Taylor R. Pressler and Eloise E. Kaizar, Statistics in Medicine 2013.
    Schmidt AF; Hoes AW; Groenwold RH
    Stat Med; 2014 Feb; 33(3):536-7. PubMed ID: 24395074
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Clinical trials methodology: randomization, intent-to-treat, and random-effects regression.
    Atkins DC
    Depress Anxiety; 2009; 26(8):697-700. PubMed ID: 19658122
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Alternatives to Randomised Controlled Trials for the Poor, the Impatient, and When Evaluating Emerging Technologies.
    Mani K; Björck M
    Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg; 2019 Apr; 57(4):598-599. PubMed ID: 30509892
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Making inferences on treatment effects from real world data: propensity scores, confounding by indication, and other perils for the unwary in observational research.
    Freemantle N; Marston L; Walters K; Wood J; Reynolds MR; Petersen I
    BMJ; 2013 Nov; 347():f6409. PubMed ID: 24217206
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Estimating the causal effect of randomization versus treatment preference in a doubly randomized preference trial.
    Marcus SM; Stuart EA; Wang P; Shadish WR; Steiner PM
    Psychol Methods; 2012 Jun; 17(2):244-54. PubMed ID: 22563844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Propensity Score Methods: Theory and Practice for Anesthesia Research.
    Schulte PJ; Mascha EJ
    Anesth Analg; 2018 Oct; 127(4):1074-1084. PubMed ID: 29750691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Propensity score methods for creating covariate balance in observational studies].
    Pattanayak CW; Rubin DB; Zell ER
    Rev Esp Cardiol; 2011 Oct; 64(10):897-903. PubMed ID: 21872981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Statistical principles: myths or facts?
    Sylvester R
    Onkologie; 2003 Dec; 26(6):520-1. PubMed ID: 14709923
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Statistical trial designs and clinical practice: are they compatible?
    Punt CJ
    Onkologie; 2003 Dec; 26(6):518-9. PubMed ID: 14709922
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Statistics Commentary Series. Commentary No. 41: Randomization.
    Streiner DL
    J Clin Psychopharmacol; 2020; 40(5):439-440. PubMed ID: 32773494
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. ALS issues in clinical trials. Missing data.
    Thompson JL; Levy G
    Amyotroph Lateral Scler Other Motor Neuron Disord; 2004 Sep; 5 Suppl 1():48-51. PubMed ID: 15512872
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Misuse of randomization: a review of Chinese randomized trials of herbal medicines for chronic hepatitis B.
    Liu J; Kjaergard LL; Gluud C
    Am J Chin Med; 2002; 30(1):173-6. PubMed ID: 12067091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Methodological issues of randomized controlled trials for the evaluation of reproductive health interventions.
    Villar J; Carroli G
    Prev Med; 1996; 25(3):365-75. PubMed ID: 8781015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Inconsistent treatment estimates from mis-specified logistic regression analyses of randomized trials.
    Matthews JN; Badi NH
    Stat Med; 2015 Aug; 34(19):2681-94. PubMed ID: 25869059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Regulatory considerations in the design of comparative observational studies using propensity scores.
    Yue LQ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1272-9. PubMed ID: 23075022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Propensity Score Matching: Retrospective Randomization?
    Jupiter DC
    J Foot Ankle Surg; 2017; 56(2):417-420. PubMed ID: 28231973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Minimizing predictability while retaining balance through the use of less restrictive randomization procedures.
    Berger VW; Ivanova A; Knoll MD
    Stat Med; 2003 Oct; 22(19):3017-28. PubMed ID: 12973784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.