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 *

85 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30294055)

  • 1. Accounting for non-response bias using participation incentives and survey design: An application using gift vouchers.
    McGovern ME; Canning D; Bärnighausen T
    Econ Lett; 2018 Oct; 171():239-244. PubMed ID: 30294055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Adjusting HIV prevalence estimates for non-participation: an application to demographic surveillance.
    McGovern ME; Marra G; Radice R; Canning D; Newell ML; Bärnighausen T
    J Int AIDS Soc; 2015; 18(1):19954. PubMed ID: 26613900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. On the assumption of bivariate normality in selection models: a Copula approach applied to estimating HIV prevalence.
    McGovern ME; Bärnighausen T; Marra G; Radice R
    Epidemiology; 2015 Mar; 26(2):229-37. PubMed ID: 25643102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Using interviewer random effects to remove selection bias from HIV prevalence estimates.
    McGovern ME; Bärnighausen T; Salomon JA; Canning D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2015 Feb; 15():8. PubMed ID: 25656226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Correcting HIV prevalence estimates for survey nonparticipation using Heckman-type selection models.
    Bärnighausen T; Bor J; Wandira-Kazibwe S; Canning D
    Epidemiology; 2011 Jan; 22(1):27-35. PubMed ID: 21150352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. National South African HIV prevalence estimates robust despite substantial test non-participation.
    Harling G; Moyo S; McGovern ME; Mabaso M; Marra G; Bärnighausen T; Rehle T
    S Afr Med J; 2017 Jun; 107(7):590-594. PubMed ID: 29025448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Copula selection models for non-Gaussian outcomes that are missing not at random.
    Gomes M; Radice R; Camarena Brenes J; Marra G
    Stat Med; 2019 Feb; 38(3):480-496. PubMed ID: 30298525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Gift card incentives and non-response bias in a survey of vaccine providers: the role of geographic and demographic factors.
    Van Otterloo J; Richards JL; Seib K; Weiss P; Omer SB
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(11):e28108. PubMed ID: 22132224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using instruments for selection to adjust for selection bias in Mendelian randomization.
    Gkatzionis A; Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ; Heron J; Northstone K; Tilling K
    Stat Med; 2024 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 39039030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Implementation of Instrumental Variable Bounds for Data Missing Not at Random.
    Marden JR; Wang L; Tchetgen EJT; Walter S; Glymour MM; Wirth KE
    Epidemiology; 2018 May; 29(3):364-368. PubMed ID: 29394191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Role of survey response rates on valid inference: an application to HIV prevalence estimates.
    Marino M; Pagano M
    Emerg Themes Epidemiol; 2018; 15():6. PubMed ID: 29527231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Do gifts increase consent to home-based HIV testing? A difference-in-differences study in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
    McGovern ME; Herbst K; Tanser F; Mutevedzi T; Canning D; Gareta D; Pillay D; Bärnighausen T
    Int J Epidemiol; 2016 Dec; 45(6):2100-2109. PubMed ID: 27940483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A two-phase sampling survey for nonresponse and its paradata to correct nonresponse bias in a health surveillance survey.
    Santin G; Bénézet L; Geoffroy-Perez B; Bouyer J; Guéguen A
    Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 2017 Feb; 65(1):71-79. PubMed ID: 28104317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Population and antenatal-based HIV prevalence estimates in a high contracepting female population in rural South Africa.
    Rice BD; Bätzing-Feigenbaum J; Hosegood V; Tanser F; Hill C; Barnighausen T; Herbst K; Welz T; Newell ML
    BMC Public Health; 2007 Jul; 7():160. PubMed ID: 17640354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A simulation study of diagnostics for selection bias.
    Boonstra PS; Little RJA; West BT; Andridge RR; Alvarado-Leiton F
    J Off Stat; 2021 Sep; 37(3):751-769. PubMed ID: 34566235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Non-ignorable missingness in logistic regression.
    Wang JJJ; Bartlett M; Ryan L
    Stat Med; 2017 Aug; 36(19):3005-3021. PubMed ID: 28574592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Multiple imputation for handling missing outcome data when estimating the relative risk.
    Sullivan TR; Lee KJ; Ryan P; Salter AB
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Sep; 17(1):134. PubMed ID: 28877666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A copula model for repeated measurements with non-ignorable non-monotone missing outcome.
    Shen C; Weissfeld L
    Stat Med; 2006 Jul; 25(14):2427-40. PubMed ID: 16143999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Explicating the Conditions Under Which Multilevel Multiple Imputation Mitigates Bias Resulting from Random Coefficient-Dependent Missing Longitudinal Data.
    Gottfredson NC; Sterba SK; Jackson KM
    Prev Sci; 2017 Jan; 18(1):12-19. PubMed ID: 27866307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Indices of non-ignorable selection bias for proportions estimated from non-probability samples.
    Andridge RR; West BT; Little RJA; Boonstra PS; Alvarado-Leiton F
    J R Stat Soc Ser C Appl Stat; 2019 Nov; 68(5):1465-1483. PubMed ID: 33304001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.