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 *

234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29622292)

  • 1. Propensity Score Methods for Bias Reduction in Observational Studies of Treatment Effect.
    Johnson SR; Tomlinson GA; Hawker GA; Granton JT; Feldman BM
    Rheum Dis Clin North Am; 2018 May; 44(2):203-213. PubMed ID: 29622292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Controlling for confounding via propensity score methods can result in biased estimation of the conditional AUC: A simulation study.
    Galadima HI; McClish DK
    Pharm Stat; 2019 Oct; 18(5):568-582. PubMed ID: 31111682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Propensity Score Methods in Rare Disease: A Demonstration Using Observational Data in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.
    Almaghlouth I; Pullenayegum E; Gladman DD; Urowitz MB; Johnson SR
    J Rheumatol; 2021 Mar; 48(3):321-325. PubMed ID: 32611674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Alternative approaches for confounding adjustment in observational studies using weighting based on the propensity score: a primer for practitioners.
    Desai RJ; Franklin JM
    BMJ; 2019 Oct; 367():l5657. PubMed ID: 31645336
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluating large-scale propensity score performance through real-world and synthetic data experiments.
    Tian Y; Schuemie MJ; Suchard MA
    Int J Epidemiol; 2018 Dec; 47(6):2005-2014. PubMed ID: 29939268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Five Steps to Successfully Implement and Evaluate Propensity Score Matching in Clinical Research Studies.
    Staffa SJ; Zurakowski D
    Anesth Analg; 2018 Oct; 127(4):1066-1073. PubMed ID: 29324498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Causal Inference in Observational Studies.
    Schuler MS; Rose S
    Am J Epidemiol; 2017 Jan; 185(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 27941068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Testing causal effects in observational survival data using propensity score matching design.
    Lu B; Cai D; Tong X
    Stat Med; 2018 May; 37(11):1846-1858. PubMed ID: 29399833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. An overview of the objectives of and the approaches to propensity score analyses.
    Heinze G; Jüni P
    Eur Heart J; 2011 Jul; 32(14):1704-8. PubMed ID: 21362706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Double propensity-score adjustment: A solution to design bias or bias due to incomplete matching.
    Austin PC
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Feb; 26(1):201-222. PubMed ID: 25038071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison between treatment effects in a randomised controlled trial and an observational study using propensity scores in primary care.
    Stuart BL; Grebel LE; Butler CC; Hood K; Verheij TJM; Little P
    Br J Gen Pract; 2017 Sep; 67(662):e643-e649. PubMed ID: 28760739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Propensity-score analysis in thoracic surgery: When, why, and an introduction to how.
    Winger DG; Nason KS
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2016 Jun; 151(6):1484-7. PubMed ID: 27207121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Propensity score methods to control for confounding in observational cohort studies: a statistical primer and application to endoscopy research.
    Yang JY; Webster-Clark M; Lund JL; Sandler RS; Dellon ES; Stürmer T
    Gastrointest Endosc; 2019 Sep; 90(3):360-369. PubMed ID: 31051156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.