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 *

561 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29284414)

  • 61. Validity evaluation of indirect adjustment method for multiple unmeasured confounders: A simulation and empirical study.
    Byun G; Kim H; Kim SY; Kim SS; Oh H; Lee JT
    Environ Res; 2022 Mar; 204(Pt A):111992. PubMed ID: 34487697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Does marital status correlate with the female breast cancer risk? A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
    Li M; Han M; Chen Z; Tang Y; Ma J; Zhang Z; Liu Z; Zhang N; Xi C; Liu J; Tian D; Wang X; Huang X; Chen J; Wang W; Zhai S
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0229899. PubMed ID: 32134997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Evaluation of confounding in epidemiologic studies assessing alcohol consumption on the risk of ischemic heart disease.
    Wallach JD; Serghiou S; Chu L; Egilman AC; Vasiliou V; Ross JS; Ioannidis JPA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Mar; 20(1):64. PubMed ID: 32171256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Adjustment for baseline characteristics in randomized trials using logistic regression: sample-based model versus true model.
    Perneger T; Combescure C; Poncet A
    Trials; 2023 Feb; 24(1):107. PubMed ID: 36782238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Meta-analysis under imbalance in measurement of confounders in cohort studies using only summary-level data.
    Ray D; Muñoz A; Zhang M; Li X; Chatterjee N; Jacobson LP; Lau B
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 May; 22(1):143. PubMed ID: 35590267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Adjusted odds ratios for case-control studies with missing confounder data in controls.
    Suissa S; Edwardes MD
    Epidemiology; 1997 May; 8(3):275-80. PubMed ID: 9115022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Interpretation of epidemiologic studies very often lacked adequate consideration of confounding.
    Hemkens LG; Ewald H; Naudet F; Ladanie A; Shaw JG; Sajeev G; Ioannidis JPA
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Jan; 93():94-102. PubMed ID: 28943377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Consideration of confounding in epidemiologic studies assessing alcohol consumption on the risk of breast cancer: A brief report.
    Chu L; Wallach JD
    Chem Biol Interact; 2020 May; 322():109060. PubMed ID: 32171849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Should we adjust for a confounder if empirical and theoretical criteria yield contradictory results? A simulation study.
    Lee PH
    Sci Rep; 2014 Aug; 4():6085. PubMed ID: 25124526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Indirect adjustment of relative risks of an exposure with multiple categories for an unmeasured confounder.
    Lubin JH; Hauptmann M; Blair A
    Ann Epidemiol; 2018 Nov; 28(11):801-807. PubMed ID: 30297163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. [Confounder adjustment in observational comparative effectiveness researches: (2) statistical adjustment approaches for unmeasured confounders].
    Huang LL; Wei YY; Chen F
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Nov; 40(11):1450-1455. PubMed ID: 31838820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Meta-analysis in cancer epidemiology.
    Morris RD
    Environ Health Perspect; 1994 Nov; 102 Suppl 8(Suppl 8):61-6. PubMed ID: 7851334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Confounding and bias in observational studies in inflammatory bowel disease: a meta-epidemiological study.
    Piovani D; Pansieri C; Peyrin-Biroulet L; Danese S; Bonovas S
    Aliment Pharmacol Ther; 2021 Mar; 53(6):712-721. PubMed ID: 33296517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Methodological issues in observational studies and non-randomized controlled trials in oncology in the era of big data.
    Tanaka S; Tanaka S; Kawakami K
    Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2015 Apr; 45(4):323-7. PubMed ID: 25589456
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses.
    Engels EA; Schmid CH; Terrin N; Olkin I; Lau J
    Stat Med; 2000 Jul; 19(13):1707-28. PubMed ID: 10861773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Application of credibility ceilings probes the robustness of meta-analyses of biomarkers and cancer risk.
    Papatheodorou SI; Tsilidis KK; Evangelou E; Ioannidis JP
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Feb; 68(2):163-74. PubMed ID: 25433443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Using computable knowledge mined from the literature to elucidate confounders for EHR-based pharmacovigilance.
    Malec SA; Wei P; Bernstam EV; Boyce RD; Cohen T
    J Biomed Inform; 2021 May; 117():103719. PubMed ID: 33716168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Covariate adjustments in randomized controlled trials increased study power and reduced biasedness of effect size estimation.
    Lee PH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Aug; 76():137-46. PubMed ID: 26921693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. A sensitivity analysis to separate bias due to confounding from bias due to predicting misclassification by a variable that does both.
    Lash TL; Silliman RA
    Epidemiology; 2000 Sep; 11(5):544-9. PubMed ID: 10955407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Model specification and unmeasured confounders in partially ecologic analyses based on group proportions of exposed.
    Björk J; Strömberg U
    Scand J Work Environ Health; 2005 Jun; 31(3):184-90. PubMed ID: 15999570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 29.