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 *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31764215)

  • 1. Selecting the best meta-analytic estimator for evidence-based practice: a simulation study.
    Doi SAR; Furuya-Kanamori L
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2020 Mar; 18(1):86-94. PubMed ID: 31764215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Jackson D; Bowden J; Veroniki AA; Kontopantelis E; Viechtbauer W; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):83-98. PubMed ID: 30067315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in combining results of studies.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    Stat Med; 2007 Apr; 26(9):1964-81. PubMed ID: 16955539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Methods for estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analysis of odds ratios.
    Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 May; 11(3):426-442. PubMed ID: 32112619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Advances in the meta-analysis of heterogeneous clinical trials I: The inverse variance heterogeneity model.
    Doi SA; Barendregt JJ; Khan S; Thalib L; Williams GM
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 Nov; 45(Pt A):130-8. PubMed ID: 26003435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Viechtbauer W; Bender R; Bowden J; Knapp G; Kuss O; Higgins JP; Langan D; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2016 Mar; 7(1):55-79. PubMed ID: 26332144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of 20 heterogeneity variance estimators in statistical synthesis of results from studies: a simulation study.
    Petropoulou M; Mavridis D
    Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(27):4266-4280. PubMed ID: 28815652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Advances in the meta-analysis of heterogeneous clinical trials II: The quality effects model.
    Doi SA; Barendregt JJ; Khan S; Thalib L; Williams GM
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 Nov; 45(Pt A):123-9. PubMed ID: 26003432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of heterogeneity and heterogeneity interval estimators in random-effects meta-analysis of the standardized mean difference in education and psychology.
    Boedeker P; Henson RK
    Psychol Methods; 2020 Jun; 25(3):346-364. PubMed ID: 31599614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of methods for meta-analysis of a small number of studies with binary outcomes.
    Mathes T; Kuss O
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Sep; 9(3):366-381. PubMed ID: 29573180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A note on variance estimation in random effects meta-regression.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    J Biopharm Stat; 2005; 15(5):823-38. PubMed ID: 16078388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Heterogeneity estimation in meta-analysis of standardized mean differences when the distribution of random effects departs from normal: A Monte Carlo simulation study.
    Blázquez-Rincón D; Sánchez-Meca J; Botella J; Suero M
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2023 Jan; 23(1):19. PubMed ID: 36650428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparative performance of heterogeneity variance estimators in meta-analysis: a review of simulation studies.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Jun; 8(2):181-198. PubMed ID: 27060925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An improved method for bivariate meta-analysis when within-study correlations are unknown.
    Hong C; D Riley R; Chen Y
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Mar; 9(1):73-88. PubMed ID: 29055096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Estimation of an overall standardized mean difference in random-effects meta-analysis if the distribution of random effects departs from normal.
    Rubio-Aparicio M; López-López JA; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F; Viechtbauer W; Van den Noortgate W
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Sep; 9(3):489-503. PubMed ID: 29989344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A generalized-weights solution to sample overlap in meta-analysis.
    Bom PRD; Rachinger H
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 Nov; 11(6):812-832. PubMed ID: 32790019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Using Monte Carlo experiments to select meta-analytic estimators.
    Hong S; Reed WR
    Res Synth Methods; 2021 Mar; 12(2):192-215. PubMed ID: 33150663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A note on the empirical Bayes heterogeneity variance estimator in meta-analysis.
    Sidik K; Jonkman JN
    Stat Med; 2019 Sep; 38(20):3804-3816. PubMed ID: 31209917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of variance estimators for meta-analysis of instrumental variable estimates.
    Schmidt AF; Hingorani AD; Jefferis BJ; White J; Groenwold R; Dudbridge F;
    Int J Epidemiol; 2016 Dec; 45(6):1975-1986. PubMed ID: 27591262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Beta-binomial model for meta-analysis of odds ratios.
    Bakbergenuly I; Kulinskaya E
    Stat Med; 2017 May; 36(11):1715-1734. PubMed ID: 28124446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.