181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31488202)
1. Interval-cohort designs and bias in the estimation of per-protocol effects: a simulation study.
Young JG; Vatsa R; Murray EJ; Hernán MA
Trials; 2019 Sep; 20(1):552. PubMed ID: 31488202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bias of time-varying exposure effects due to time-varying covariate measurement strategies.
Penning de Vries BBL; Groenwold RHH
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2022 Jan; 31(1):22-27. PubMed ID: 34251702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Adjusting for adherence in randomized trials when adherence is measured as a continuous variable: An application to the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial.
Wanis KN; Madenci AL; Hernán MA; Murray EJ
Clin Trials; 2020 Oct; 17(5):570-575. PubMed ID: 32414298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Overview of the epidemiology methods and applications: strengths and limitations of observational study designs.
Colditz GA
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr; 2010; 50 Suppl 1(s1):10-2. PubMed ID: 21132580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Adjustment for treatment changes in epilepsy trials: A comparison of causal methods for time-to-event outcomes.
Dodd S; Williamson P; White IR
Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Mar; 28(3):717-733. PubMed ID: 29117780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparing g-computation, propensity score-based weighting, and targeted maximum likelihood estimation for analyzing externally controlled trials with both measured and unmeasured confounders: a simulation study.
Ren J; Cislo P; Cappelleri JC; Hlavacek P; DiBonaventura M
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Jan; 23(1):18. PubMed ID: 36647031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies.
Hogan JW; Lancaster T
Stat Methods Med Res; 2004 Feb; 13(1):17-48. PubMed ID: 14746439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Generalizing the per-protocol treatment effect: The case of ACTG A5095.
Lu H; Cole SR; Hall HI; Schisterman EF; Breger TL; K Edwards J; Westreich D
Clin Trials; 2019 Feb; 16(1):52-62. PubMed ID: 30326736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Statistical considerations in the design and analysis of non-inferiority trials with binary endpoints in the presence of non-adherence: a simulation study.
Mo Y; Lim C; Mukaka M; Cooper BS
Wellcome Open Res; 2019; 4():207. PubMed ID: 32420455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A Simulation Study Comparing the Performance of Time-Varying Inverse Probability Weighting and G-Computation in Survival Analysis.
Rudolph JE; Schisterman EF; Naimi AI
Am J Epidemiol; 2023 Jan; 192(1):102-110. PubMed ID: 36124667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessing efficacy in non-inferiority trials with non-adherence to interventions: Are intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses fit for purpose?
Dodd M; Carpenter J; Thompson JA; Williamson E; Fielding K; Elbourne D
Stat Med; 2024 May; 43(12):2314-2331. PubMed ID: 38561927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clarifying selection bias in cluster randomized trials.
Li F; Tian Z; Bobb J; Papadogeorgou G; Li F
Clin Trials; 2022 Feb; 19(1):33-41. PubMed ID: 34894795
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A comparison of different methods to adjust survival curves for confounders.
Denz R; Klaaßen-Mielke R; Timmesfeld N
Stat Med; 2023 May; 42(10):1461-1479. PubMed ID: 36748630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The effect of framing and communicating COVID-19 vaccine side-effect risks on vaccine intentions for adults in the UK and the USA: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Sudharsanan N; Favaretti C; Hachaturyan V; Bärnighausen T; Vandormael A
Trials; 2021 Sep; 22(1):592. PubMed ID: 34488843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Investigation of the structure and magnitude of time-varying uncontrolled confounding in simulated cohort data analyzed using g-computation.
Soohoo M; Arah OA
Int J Epidemiol; 2023 Dec; 52(6):1907-1913. PubMed ID: 37898996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bias in retrospective analyses of biomarker effect using data from an outcome-adaptive randomized trial.
Ji L; McShane LM; Krailo M; Sposto R
Clin Trials; 2019 Dec; 16(6):599-609. PubMed ID: 31581815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Using audit information to adjust parameter estimates for data errors in clinical trials.
Shepherd BE; Shaw PA; Dodd LE
Clin Trials; 2012 Dec; 9(6):721-9. PubMed ID: 22848072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Confounding and regression adjustment in difference-in-differences studies.
Zeldow B; Hatfield LA
Health Serv Res; 2021 Oct; 56(5):932-941. PubMed ID: 33978956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of estimators from self-controlled case series, case-crossover design, and sequence symmetry analysis for pharmacoepidemiological studies.
Takeuchi Y; Shinozaki T; Matsuyama Y
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Jan; 18(1):4. PubMed ID: 29310575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
