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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31640504)

  • 1. Using instrumental variables to estimate the attributable fraction.
    Dahlqwist E; Kutalik Z; Sjölander A
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Aug; 29(8):2063-2073. PubMed ID: 31640504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Testing concordance of instrumental variable effects in generalized linear models with application to Mendelian randomization.
    Dai JY; Chan KC; Hsu L
    Stat Med; 2014 Oct; 33(23):3986-4007. PubMed ID: 24863158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Severity of bias of a simple estimator of the causal odds ratio in Mendelian randomization studies.
    Harbord RM; Didelez V; Palmer TM; Meng S; Sterne JA; Sheehan NA
    Stat Med; 2013 Mar; 32(7):1246-58. PubMed ID: 23080538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A review of instrumental variable estimators for Mendelian randomization.
    Burgess S; Small DS; Thompson SG
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Oct; 26(5):2333-2355. PubMed ID: 26282889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Network Mendelian randomization: using genetic variants as instrumental variables to investigate mediation in causal pathways.
    Burgess S; Daniel RM; Butterworth AS; Thompson SG;
    Int J Epidemiol; 2015 Apr; 44(2):484-95. PubMed ID: 25150977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Mendelian randomization with incomplete measurements on the exposure in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.
    Li Y; Wong KY; Howard AG; Gordon-Larsen P; Highland HM; Graff M; North KE; Downie CG; Avery CL; Yu B; Young KL; Buchanan VL; Kaplan R; Hou L; Joyce BT; Qi Q; Sofer T; Moon JY; Lin DY
    HGG Adv; 2024 Jan; 5(1):100245. PubMed ID: 37817410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Challenges and factors that influencing causal inference and interpretation, based on Mendelian randomization studies].
    Wang YZ; Shen HB
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2020 Aug; 41(8):1231-1236. PubMed ID: 32867428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mendelian randomization studies for a continuous exposure under case-control sampling.
    Dai JY; Zhang XC
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Mar; 181(6):440-9. PubMed ID: 25713335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Combining information on multiple instrumental variables in Mendelian randomization: comparison of allele score and summarized data methods.
    Burgess S; Dudbridge F; Thompson SG
    Stat Med; 2016 May; 35(11):1880-906. PubMed ID: 26661904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Identifying the odds ratio estimated by a two-stage instrumental variable analysis with a logistic regression model.
    Burgess S;
    Stat Med; 2013 Nov; 32(27):4726-47. PubMed ID: 23733419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. MR-BOIL: Causal inference in one-sample Mendelian randomization for binary outcome with integrated likelihood method.
    Shi D; Wang Y; Zhang Z; Cao Y; Hu YQ
    Genet Epidemiol; 2023 Jun; 47(4):332-357. PubMed ID: 36808763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mendelian Randomization as an Approach to Assess Causality Using Observational Data.
    Sekula P; Del Greco M F; Pattaro C; Köttgen A
    J Am Soc Nephrol; 2016 Nov; 27(11):3253-3265. PubMed ID: 27486138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mendelian randomization as a tool for causal inference in human nutrition and metabolism.
    Larsson SC
    Curr Opin Lipidol; 2021 Feb; 32(1):1-8. PubMed ID: 33278081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mendelian randomization using semiparametric linear transformation models.
    Huang YT
    Stat Med; 2020 Mar; 39(7):890-905. PubMed ID: 31879996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An efficient and robust approach to Mendelian randomization with measured pleiotropic effects in a high-dimensional setting.
    Grant AJ; Burgess S
    Biostatistics; 2022 Apr; 23(2):609-625. PubMed ID: 33155035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On the use of kernel machines for Mendelian randomization.
    Zhang W; Ghosh D
    Quant Biol; 2017 Dec; 5(4):368-379. PubMed ID: 30221016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Two robust tools for inference about causal effects with invalid instruments.
    Kang H; Lee Y; Cai TT; Small DS
    Biometrics; 2022 Mar; 78(1):24-34. PubMed ID: 33616910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Causal association of body mass index with hypertension using a Mendelian randomization design.
    Lee MR; Lim YH; Hong YC
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2018 Jul; 97(30):e11252. PubMed ID: 30045251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A novel Mendelian randomization method with binary risk factor and outcome.
    Allman PH; Aban I; Long DM; Bridges SL; Srinivasasainagendra V; MacKenzie T; Cutter G; Tiwari HK
    Genet Epidemiol; 2021 Jul; 45(5):549-560. PubMed ID: 33998053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The many weak instruments problem and Mendelian randomization.
    Davies NM; von Hinke Kessler Scholder S; Farbmacher H; Burgess S; Windmeijer F; Smith GD
    Stat Med; 2015 Feb; 34(3):454-68. PubMed ID: 25382280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.