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 *

298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29989344)

  • 1. Estimation of an overall standardized mean difference in random-effects meta-analysis if the distribution of random effects departs from normal.
    Rubio-Aparicio M; López-López JA; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F; Viechtbauer W; Van den Noortgate W
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Sep; 9(3):489-503. PubMed ID: 29989344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Heterogeneity estimation in meta-analysis of standardized mean differences when the distribution of random effects departs from normal: A Monte Carlo simulation study.
    Blázquez-Rincón D; Sánchez-Meca J; Botella J; Suero M
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Jan; 23(1):19. PubMed ID: 36650428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessing meta-regression methods for examining moderator relationships with dependent effect sizes: A Monte Carlo simulation.
    López-López JA; Van den Noortgate W; Tanner-Smith EE; Wilson SJ; Lipsey MW
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Dec; 8(4):435-450. PubMed ID: 28556477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Jackson D; Bowden J; Veroniki AA; Kontopantelis E; Viechtbauer W; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):83-98. PubMed ID: 30067315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of heterogeneity and heterogeneity interval estimators in random-effects meta-analysis of the standardized mean difference in education and psychology.
    Boedeker P; Henson RK
    Psychol Methods; 2020 Jun; 25(3):346-364. PubMed ID: 31599614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Random-effects meta-analysis of correlations: Monte Carlo evaluation of mean estimators.
    Hafdahl AR
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 Feb; 63(Pt 1):227-54. PubMed ID: 19527563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multivariate meta-analysis: a robust approach based on the theory of U-statistic.
    Ma Y; Mazumdar M
    Stat Med; 2011 Oct; 30(24):2911-29. PubMed ID: 21830230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Confidence intervals for random effects meta-analysis and robustness to publication bias.
    Henmi M; Copas JB
    Stat Med; 2010 Dec; 29(29):2969-83. PubMed ID: 20963748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Meta-analysis of rare binary events in treatment groups with unequal variability.
    Li L; Wang X
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Jan; 28(1):263-274. PubMed ID: 28760075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparing methods to estimate treatment effects on a continuous outcome in multicentre randomized controlled trials: a simulation study.
    Chu R; Thabane L; Ma J; Holbrook A; Pullenayegum E; Devereaux PJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2011 Feb; 11():21. PubMed ID: 21338524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Viechtbauer W; Bender R; Bowden J; Knapp G; Kuss O; Higgins JP; Langan D; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2016 Mar; 7(1):55-79. PubMed ID: 26332144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A double SIMEX approach for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies.
    Guolo A
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jan; 17(1):6. PubMed ID: 28077079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Methods to calculate uncertainty in the estimated overall effect size from a random-effects meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Bender R; Kuss O; Langan D; Higgins JPT; Knapp G; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):23-43. PubMed ID: 30129707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Fixed- versus random-effects models in meta-analysis: model properties and an empirical comparison of differences in results.
    Schmidt FL; Oh IS; Hayes TL
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2009 Feb; 62(Pt 1):97-128. PubMed ID: 18001516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Selecting the best meta-analytic estimator for evidence-based practice: a simulation study.
    Doi SAR; Furuya-Kanamori L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2020 Mar; 18(1):86-94. PubMed ID: 31764215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Residual Normality Assumption and the Estimation of Multiple Membership Random Effects Models.
    Chen J; Leroux AJ
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2018; 53(6):898-913. PubMed ID: 30521398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Varying coefficient meta-analytic methods for alpha reliability.
    Bonett DG
    Psychol Methods; 2010 Dec; 15(4):368-85. PubMed ID: 20853952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis.
    Viechtbauer W
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2007 May; 60(Pt 1):29-60. PubMed ID: 17535578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A random effects meta-analysis model with Box-Cox transformation.
    Yamaguchi Y; Maruo K; Partlett C; Riley RD
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jul; 17(1):109. PubMed ID: 28724350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Random-effects meta-analysis of few studies involving rare events.
    Günhan BK; Röver C; Friede T
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 Jan; 11(1):74-90. PubMed ID: 31348846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.