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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31898296)

  • 1. Handling missing data in randomization tests for single-case experiments: A simulation study.
    De TK; Michiels B; Tanious R; Onghena P
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Jun; 52(3):1355-1370. PubMed ID: 31898296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The randomized marker method for single-case randomization tests: Handling data missing at random and data missing not at random.
    De TK; Onghena P
    Behav Res Methods; 2022 Dec; 54(6):2905-2938. PubMed ID: 35132582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Imputation and missing indicators for handling missing data in the development and deployment of clinical prediction models: A simulation study.
    Sisk R; Sperrin M; Peek N; van Smeden M; Martin GP
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2023 Aug; 32(8):1461-1477. PubMed ID: 37105540
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Explicating the Conditions Under Which Multilevel Multiple Imputation Mitigates Bias Resulting from Random Coefficient-Dependent Missing Longitudinal Data.
    Gottfredson NC; Sterba SK; Jackson KM
    Prev Sci; 2017 Jan; 18(1):12-19. PubMed ID: 27866307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of different methods to handle missing data in the context of propensity score analysis.
    Choi J; Dekkers OM; le Cessie S
    Eur J Epidemiol; 2019 Jan; 34(1):23-36. PubMed ID: 30341708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Multiple imputation for handling missing outcome data when estimating the relative risk.
    Sullivan TR; Lee KJ; Ryan P; Salter AB
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Sep; 17(1):134. PubMed ID: 28877666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Handling of Missing Outcome Data in Acute Stroke Trials: Advantages of Multiple Imputation Using Baseline and Postbaseline Variables.
    Young-Saver DF; Gornbein J; Starkman S; Saver JL
    J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis; 2018 Dec; 27(12):3662-3669. PubMed ID: 30297167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Randomized single-case AB phase designs: Prospects and pitfalls.
    Michiels B; Onghena P
    Behav Res Methods; 2019 Dec; 51(6):2454-2476. PubMed ID: 30022457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Description of Missing Data in Single-Case Experimental Designs Studies and an Evaluation of Single Imputation Methods.
    Aydin O
    Behav Modif; 2024 May; 48(3):312-359. PubMed ID: 38374608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. On the joys of missing data.
    Little TD; Jorgensen TD; Lang KM; Moore EW
    J Pediatr Psychol; 2014 Mar; 39(2):151-62. PubMed ID: 23836191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Consequences of handling missing data for treatment response in osteoarthritis: a simulation study.
    Olsen IC; Kvien TK; Uhlig T
    Osteoarthritis Cartilage; 2012 Aug; 20(8):822-8. PubMed ID: 22441031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of multiple imputation methods for handling missing values in longitudinal data in the presence of a time-varying covariate with a non-linear association with time: a simulation study.
    De Silva AP; Moreno-Betancur M; De Livera AM; Lee KJ; Simpson JA
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jul; 17(1):114. PubMed ID: 28743256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An Efficient and Effective Model to Handle Missing Data in Classification.
    Mehrabani-Zeinabad K; Doostfatemeh M; Ayatollahi SMT
    Biomed Res Int; 2020; 2020():8810143. PubMed ID: 33299878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. On design considerations and randomization-based inference for community intervention trials.
    Gail MH; Mark SD; Carroll RJ; Green SB; Pee D
    Stat Med; 1996 Jun; 15(11):1069-92. PubMed ID: 8804140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dealing with missing outcome data in randomized trials and observational studies.
    Groenwold RH; Donders AR; Roes KC; Harrell FE; Moons KG
    Am J Epidemiol; 2012 Feb; 175(3):210-7. PubMed ID: 22262640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A nonparametric multiple imputation approach for missing categorical data.
    Zhou M; He Y; Yu M; Hsu CH
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Jun; 17(1):87. PubMed ID: 28587662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Handling missing rows in multi-omics data integration: multiple imputation in multiple factor analysis framework.
    Voillet V; Besse P; Liaubet L; San Cristobal M; González I
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Oct; 17(1):402. PubMed ID: 27716030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Type I error rates and power of two randomization test procedures for the changing criterion design.
    Manolov R; Tanious R
    Behav Res Methods; 2024 Apr; 56(4):3637-3657. PubMed ID: 38082114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Bias and Precision of the "Multiple Imputation, Then Deletion" Method for Dealing With Missing Outcome Data.
    Sullivan TR; Salter AB; Ryan P; Lee KJ
    Am J Epidemiol; 2015 Sep; 182(6):528-34. PubMed ID: 26337075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An overview of practical approaches for handling missing data in clinical trials.
    DeSouza CM; Legedza AT; Sankoh AJ
    J Biopharm Stat; 2009 Nov; 19(6):1055-73. PubMed ID: 20183464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.