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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32432319)

  • 1. Evaluating a Key Instrumental Variable Assumption Using Randomization Tests.
    Branson Z; Keele L
    Am J Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 189(11):1412-1420. PubMed ID: 32432319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Falsification Tests for Instrumental Variable Designs With an Application to Tendency to Operate.
    Keele L; Zhao Q; Kelz RR; Small D
    Med Care; 2019 Feb; 57(2):167-171. PubMed ID: 30520835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Time dependent hazard ratio estimation using instrumental variables without conditioning on an omitted covariate.
    MacKenzie TA; Martinez-Camblor P; O'Malley AJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2021 Mar; 21(1):56. PubMed ID: 33743583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A selective review of the first 20 years of instrumental variables models in health-services research and medicine.
    Cawley J
    J Med Econ; 2015; 18(9):721-34. PubMed ID: 25899087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sensitivity analyses for average treatment effects when outcome is censored by death in instrumental variable models.
    Lee K; Lorch SA; Small DS
    Stat Med; 2019 Jun; 38(13):2303-2316. PubMed ID: 30785641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Instrumental variables and inverse probability weighting for causal inference from longitudinal observational studies.
    Hogan JW; Lancaster T
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2004 Feb; 13(1):17-48. PubMed ID: 14746439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Methodological Challenges When Studying Distance to Care as an Exposure in Health Research.
    Caniglia EC; Zash R; Swanson SA; Wirth KE; Diseko M; Mayondi G; Lockman S; Mmalane M; Makhema J; Dryden-Peterson S; Kponee-Shovein KZ; John O; Murray EJ; Shapiro RL
    Am J Epidemiol; 2019 Sep; 188(9):1674-1681. PubMed ID: 31107529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How to compare instrumental variable and conventional regression analyses using negative controls and bias plots.
    Davies NM; Thomas KH; Taylor AE; Taylor GMJ; Martin RM; Munafò MR; Windmeijer F
    Int J Epidemiol; 2017 Dec; 46(6):2067-2077. PubMed ID: 28398582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Randomization-based inference in the presence of selection bias.
    Uschner D
    Stat Med; 2021 Apr; 40(9):2212-2229. PubMed ID: 33561882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Randomization-based inference for Bernoulli trial experiments and implications for observational studies.
    Branson Z; Bind MA
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 May; 28(5):1378-1398. PubMed ID: 29451089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public-health interventions: statistical analysis and causal inference.
    Cousens S; Hargreaves J; Bonell C; Armstrong B; Thomas J; Kirkwood BR; Hayes R
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2011 Jul; 65(7):576-81. PubMed ID: 19666633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Instrumental variable estimation of truncated local average treatment effects.
    Choi BY
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(4):e0249642. PubMed ID: 33819276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An introduction to instrumental variable assumptions, validation and estimation.
    Lousdal ML
    Emerg Themes Epidemiol; 2018; 15():1. PubMed ID: 29387137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Issues in the reporting and conduct of instrumental variable studies: a systematic review.
    Davies NM; Smith GD; Windmeijer F; Martin RM
    Epidemiology; 2013 May; 24(3):363-9. PubMed ID: 23532055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Sample size importantly limits the usefulness of instrumental variable methods, depending on instrument strength and level of confounding.
    Boef AG; Dekkers OM; Vandenbroucke JP; le Cessie S
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2014 Nov; 67(11):1258-64. PubMed ID: 25124167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Strengthening Instrumental Variables Through Weighting.
    Lehmann D; Li Y; Saran R; Li Y
    Stat Biosci; 2017 Dec; 9(2):320-338. PubMed ID: 31316679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Toward a clearer portrayal of confounding bias in instrumental variable applications.
    Jackson JW; Swanson SA
    Epidemiology; 2015 Jul; 26(4):498-504. PubMed ID: 25978796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Understanding the Assumptions Underlying Instrumental Variable Analyses: a Brief Review of Falsification Strategies and Related Tools.
    Labrecque J; Swanson SA
    Curr Epidemiol Rep; 2018; 5(3):214-220. PubMed ID: 30148040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mendelian randomization as an instrumental variable approach to causal inference.
    Didelez V; Sheehan N
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2007 Aug; 16(4):309-30. PubMed ID: 17715159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.