126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30021496)
1. Use of composite outcomes to assess risk-benefit in clinical trials.
Shaw PA
Clin Trials; 2018 Aug; 15(4):352-358. PubMed ID: 30021496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke.
Higashida RT; Furlan AJ; Roberts H; Tomsick T; Connors B; Barr J; Dillon W; Warach S; Broderick J; Tilley B; Sacks D; ;
Stroke; 2003 Aug; 34(8):e109-37. PubMed ID: 12869717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components.
Bebu I; Lachin JM
Biostatistics; 2016 Jan; 17(1):178-87. PubMed ID: 26353896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Presenting Risks and Benefits: Helping the Data Monitoring Committee Do Its Job.
Evans SR; Bigelow R; Chuang-Stein C; Ellenberg SS; Gallo P; He W; Jiang Q; Rockhold F
Ann Intern Med; 2020 Jan; 172(2):119-125. PubMed ID: 31739312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [DSMB. 2. The importance of an efficient DSMB: some examples of high-risk clinical trials].
Brun-Buisson C
Med Sci (Paris); 2005 Feb; 21(2):187-9. PubMed ID: 15691491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Adjusting win statistics for dependent censoring.
Dong G; Huang B; Wang D; Verbeeck J; Wang J; Hoaglin DC
Pharm Stat; 2021 May; 20(3):440-450. PubMed ID: 33247544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reporting mortality findings in trials of rofecoxib for Alzheimer disease or cognitive impairment: a case study based on documents from rofecoxib litigation.
Psaty BM; Kronmal RA
JAMA; 2008 Apr; 299(15):1813-7. PubMed ID: 18413875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impact of correlations between prioritized outcomes on the net benefit and its estimate by generalized pairwise comparisons.
Fuyama K; Ogawa M; Mizusawa J; Kanemitsu Y; Fujita S; Kawahara T; Sakamaki K; Oba K
Stat Med; 2023 May; 42(10):1606-1624. PubMed ID: 36849124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Opportunities and challenges of combined effect measures based on prioritized outcomes.
Rauch G; Jahn-Eimermacher A; Brannath W; Kieser M
Stat Med; 2014 Mar; 33(7):1104-20. PubMed ID: 24122841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Design of paediatric trials with benefit-risk endpoints using a composite score of adverse events of interest (AEI) and win-statistics.
Seifu Y; Mt-Isa S; Duke K; Gamalo-Siebers M; Wang W; Dong G; Kolassa J
J Biopharm Stat; 2023 Nov; 33(6):696-707. PubMed ID: 36545791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. How to construct an optimal interim report: What the data monitoring committee does and doesn't need to know.
Neaton JD; Grund B; Wentworth D
Clin Trials; 2018 Aug; 15(4):359-365. PubMed ID: 29552920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A decision rule for sequential monitoring of clinical trials with a primary and supportive outcome.
Zhao Y; Grambsch PM; Neaton JD
Clin Trials; 2007; 4(2):140-53. PubMed ID: 17456513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Understanding the functions and operations of data monitoring committees: Survey and focus group findings.
Calis KA; Archdeacon P; Bain RP; Forrest A; Perlmutter J; DeMets DL
Clin Trials; 2017 Feb; 14(1):59-66. PubMed ID: 27885056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An alternative approach to confidence interval estimation for the win ratio statistic.
Luo X; Tian H; Mohanty S; Tsai WY
Biometrics; 2015 Mar; 71(1):139-145. PubMed ID: 25156540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of the global statistical test and composite outcome for secondary analyses of multiple coronary heart disease outcomes.
Baraniuk S; Seay R; Sinha AK; Piller LB
Prog Cardiovasc Dis; 2012; 54(4):357-61. PubMed ID: 22226004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Standard versus adaptive monitoring procedures: A commentary.
Fleming TR
Stat Med; 2006 Oct; 25(19):3305-12; discussion 3313-4, 3326-47. PubMed ID: 16850447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Regulatory perspectives on data safety monitoring boards: protecting the integrity of data.
Hemmings R; Day S
Drug Saf; 2004; 27(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 14720083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The asymptotic distribution of the Net Benefit estimator in presence of right-censoring.
Ozenne B; Budtz-Jørgensen E; Péron J
Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Nov; 30(11):2399-2412. PubMed ID: 34633267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Patient-Reported Outcome and Observer-Reported Outcome Assessment in Rare Disease Clinical Trials: An ISPOR COA Emerging Good Practices Task Force Report.
Benjamin K; Vernon MK; Patrick DL; Perfetto E; Nestler-Parr S; Burke L
Value Health; 2017; 20(7):838-855. PubMed ID: 28712612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
