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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31790379)

  • 1. Application of the Instrumental Inequalities to a Mendelian Randomization Study With Multiple Proposed Instruments.
    Diemer EW; Labrecque J; Tiemeier H; Swanson SA
    Epidemiology; 2020 Jan; 31(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 31790379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression.
    Bowden J; Davey Smith G; Burgess S
    Int J Epidemiol; 2015 Apr; 44(2):512-25. PubMed ID: 26050253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Use of allele scores as instrumental variables for Mendelian randomization.
    Burgess S; Thompson SG
    Int J Epidemiol; 2013 Aug; 42(4):1134-44. PubMed ID: 24062299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mendelian randomisation approaches to the study of prenatal exposures: A systematic review.
    Diemer EW; Labrecque JA; Neumann A; Tiemeier H; Swanson SA
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2021 Jan; 35(1):130-142. PubMed ID: 32779786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bounding the average causal effect in Mendelian randomisation studies with multiple proposed instruments: An application to prenatal alcohol exposure and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
    Diemer EW; Havdahl A; Andreassen OA; Munafò MR; Njolstad PR; Tiemeier H; Zuccolo L; Swanson SA
    Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2023 May; 37(4):326-337. PubMed ID: 36722651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessing the suitability of summary data for two-sample Mendelian randomization analyses using MR-Egger regression: the role of the I2 statistic.
    Bowden J; Del Greco M F; Minelli C; Davey Smith G; Sheehan NA; Thompson JR
    Int J Epidemiol; 2016 Dec; 45(6):1961-1974. PubMed ID: 27616674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Instrumental variable analysis of multiplicative models with potentially invalid instruments.
    Shardell M; Ferrucci L
    Stat Med; 2016 Dec; 35(29):5430-5447. PubMed ID: 27527517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A Bayesian approach to Mendelian randomisation with dependent instruments.
    Shapland CY; Thompson JR; Sheehan NA
    Stat Med; 2019 Mar; 38(6):985-1001. PubMed ID: 30485479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Weak-instrument robust tests in two-sample summary-data Mendelian randomization.
    Wang S; Kang H
    Biometrics; 2022 Dec; 78(4):1699-1713. PubMed ID: 34213007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Review on correction methods related to the pleiotropic effect in Mendelian randomization].
    Gao X; Wang H; Wang T
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2019 Mar; 40(3):360-365. PubMed ID: 30884619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Improving the accuracy of two-sample summary-data Mendelian randomization: moving beyond the NOME assumption.
    Bowden J; Del Greco M F; Minelli C; Zhao Q; Lawlor DA; Sheehan NA; Thompson J; Davey Smith G
    Int J Epidemiol; 2019 Jun; 48(3):728-742. PubMed ID: 30561657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Extending Causality Tests with Genetic Instruments: An Integration of Mendelian Randomization with the Classical Twin Design.
    Minică CC; Dolan CV; Boomsma DI; de Geus E; Neale MC
    Behav Genet; 2018 Jul; 48(4):337-349. PubMed ID: 29882082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using multiple genetic variants as instrumental variables for modifiable risk factors.
    Palmer TM; Lawlor DA; Harbord RM; Sheehan NA; Tobias JH; Timpson NJ; Davey Smith G; Sterne JA
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2012 Jun; 21(3):223-42. PubMed ID: 21216802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Methodological challenges in mendelian randomization.
    VanderWeele TJ; Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ; Cornelis M; Kraft P
    Epidemiology; 2014 May; 25(3):427-35. PubMed ID: 24681576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. A general approach to sensitivity analysis for Mendelian randomization.
    Zhang W; Ghosh D
    Stat Biosci; 2021 Apr; 13(1):34-55. PubMed ID: 33737984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mendelian randomization in the multivariate general linear model framework.
    Allman PH; Aban I; Long DM; Patki A; MacKenzie T; Irvin MR; Lange LA; Lange E; Cutter G; Tiwari HK
    Genet Epidemiol; 2022 Feb; 46(1):17-31. PubMed ID: 34672390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Inference about causation from examination of familial confounding (ICE FALCON): a model for assessing causation analogous to Mendelian randomization.
    Li S; Bui M; Hopper JL
    Int J Epidemiol; 2020 Aug; 49(4):1259-1269. PubMed ID: 32500139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mendelian randomization mixed-scale treatment effect robust identification and estimation for causal inference.
    Liu Z; Ye T; Sun B; Schooling M; Tchetgen ET
    Biometrics; 2023 Sep; 79(3):2208-2219. PubMed ID: 35950778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.