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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31553488)

  • 21. Statistical methodology for estimating the mean difference in a meta-analysis without study-specific variance information.
    Sangnawakij P; Böhning D; Adams S; Stanton M; Holling H
    Stat Med; 2017 Apr; 36(9):1395-1413. PubMed ID: 28168731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances.
    Prendergast LA; Staudte RG
    Stat Med; 2016 May; 35(11):1780-99. PubMed ID: 27062644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Comparison of one-step and two-step meta-analysis models using individual patient data.
    Mathew T; Nordström K
    Biom J; 2010 Apr; 52(2):271-87. PubMed ID: 20349448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Median regression models for longitudinal data with dropouts.
    Yi GY; He W
    Biometrics; 2009 Jun; 65(2):618-25. PubMed ID: 18759840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Transforming the Model T: random effects meta-analysis with stable weights.
    Malloy MJ; Prendergast LA; Staudte RG
    Stat Med; 2013 May; 32(11):1842-64. PubMed ID: 23097338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Meta-analysis of rare events under the assumption of a homogeneous treatment effect.
    Piaget-Rossel R; Taffé P
    Biom J; 2019 Nov; 61(6):1557-1574. PubMed ID: 31172565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Median regression model with interval censored data.
    Kim YJ; Cho H; Kim J; Jhun M
    Biom J; 2010 Apr; 52(2):201-8. PubMed ID: 20394082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparing survival curves based on medians.
    Chen Z; Zhang G
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Mar; 16():33. PubMed ID: 26983640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Consequences of sequential sampling for meta-analysis.
    Braschi L; Botella J; Suero M
    Behav Res Methods; 2014 Dec; 46(4):1167-83. PubMed ID: 24399083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A re-evaluation of the 'quantile approximation method' for random effects meta-analysis.
    Jackson D; Bowden J
    Stat Med; 2009 Jan; 28(2):338-48. PubMed ID: 19016302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Why add anything to nothing? The arcsine difference as a measure of treatment effect in meta-analysis with zero cells.
    Rücker G; Schwarzer G; Carpenter J; Olkin I
    Stat Med; 2009 Feb; 28(5):721-38. PubMed ID: 19072749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Testing for homogeneity in meta-analysis I. The one-parameter case: standardized mean difference.
    Kulinskaya E; Dollinger MB; Bjørkestøl K
    Biometrics; 2011 Mar; 67(1):203-12. PubMed ID: 20528863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Plug-in tests for nonequivalence of means of independent normal populations.
    Choi S; Park J
    Biom J; 2014 Nov; 56(6):1016-34. PubMed ID: 25220905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Accounting for variability in sample size estimation with applications to nonadherence and estimation of variance and effect size.
    Fay MP; Halloran ME; Follmann DA
    Biometrics; 2007 Jun; 63(2):465-74. PubMed ID: 17688499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of concordance correlation coefficient estimating approaches with skewed data.
    Carrasco JL; Jover L; King TS; Chinchilli VM
    J Biopharm Stat; 2007; 17(4):673-84. PubMed ID: 17613647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A Welch-type test for homogeneity of contrasts under heteroscedasticity with application to meta-analysis.
    Kulinskaya E; Dollinger MB; Knight E; Gao H
    Stat Med; 2004 Dec; 23(23):3655-70. PubMed ID: 15534893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Confidence intervals for the difference in the success rates of two treatments in the analysis of correlated binary responses.
    Saha KK; Wang S
    Biom J; 2019 Jul; 61(4):983-1002. PubMed ID: 30843251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Robust variance estimation with dependent effect sizes: practical considerations including a software tutorial in Stata and spss.
    Tanner-Smith EE; Tipton E
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Mar; 5(1):13-30. PubMed ID: 26054023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. An application of targeted maximum likelihood estimation to the meta-analysis of safety data.
    Gruber S; van der Laan MJ
    Biometrics; 2013 Mar; 69(1):254-62. PubMed ID: 23379761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. On the relationship between the causal-inference and meta-analytic paradigms for the validation of surrogate endpoints.
    Alonso A; Van der Elst W; Molenberghs G; Buyse M; Burzykowski T
    Biometrics; 2015 Mar; 71(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 25274284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.