226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32854161)
1. Bias testing, bias correction, and confounder selection using an instrumental variable model.
Yeob Choi B; Fine JP; Alan Brookhart M
Stat Med; 2020 Dec; 39(29):4386-4404. PubMed ID: 32854161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. On a preference-based instrumental variable approach in reducing unmeasured confounding-by-indication.
Li Y; Lee Y; Wolfe RA; Morgenstern H; Zhang J; Port FK; Robinson BM
Stat Med; 2015 Mar; 34(7):1150-68. PubMed ID: 25546152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Instrumental variables vs. grouping approach for reducing bias due to measurement error.
Batistatou E; McNamee R
Int J Biostat; 2008; 4(1):Article 8. PubMed ID: 22462115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Simple efficient bias corrected instrumental variable estimator for randomized trials with noncompliance.
Chan KC
Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):786-93. PubMed ID: 22484340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impact of unmeasured within- and between-cluster confounding on the bias of effect estimatorsof a continuous exposure.
Li Y; Lee Y; Port FK; Robinson BM
Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Aug; 29(8):2119-2139. PubMed ID: 31694489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing causal treatment effect estimation when using large observational datasets.
John ER; Abrams KR; Brightling CE; Sheehan NA
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Nov; 19(1):207. PubMed ID: 31726969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the performance of physician's prescribing preference as an instrumental variable in comparative effectiveness research with moderate and small sample sizes: a simulation study.
Zhang L; Lewsey J; McAllister DA
J Comp Eff Res; 2024 May; 13(5):e230044. PubMed ID: 38567966
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Can we make smart choices between OLS and contaminated IV methods?
Basu A; Chan KC
Health Econ; 2014 Apr; 23(4):462-72. PubMed ID: 23765683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Stein-like estimators for causal mediation analysis in randomized trials.
Ginestet CE; Emsley R; Landau S
Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Apr; 29(4):1129-1148. PubMed ID: 31172884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Some cautions on the use of instrumental variables estimators in outcomes research: how bias in instrumental variables estimators is affected by instrument strength, instrument contamination, and sample size.
Crown WH; Henk HJ; Vanness DJ
Value Health; 2011 Dec; 14(8):1078-84. PubMed ID: 22152177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Instrumental variable estimation of the causal hazard ratio.
Wang L; Tchetgen Tchetgen E; Martinussen T; Vansteelandt S
Biometrics; 2023 Jun; 79(2):539-550. PubMed ID: 36377509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Two-stage instrumental variable methods for estimating the causal odds ratio: analysis of bias.
Cai B; Small DS; Have TR
Stat Med; 2011 Jul; 30(15):1809-24. PubMed ID: 21495062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Instrumental Variable Analyses and Selection Bias.
Canan C; Lesko C; Lau B
Epidemiology; 2017 May; 28(3):396-398. PubMed ID: 28169934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bias analysis of the instrumental variable estimator as an estimator of the average causal effect.
Chiba Y
Contemp Clin Trials; 2010 Jan; 31(1):12-7. PubMed ID: 19879376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The productivity of mental health care: an instrumental variable approach.
Lu M
J Ment Health Policy Econ; 1999 Jun; 2(2):59-71. PubMed ID: 11967410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Analysis approaches to address treatment nonadherence in pragmatic trials with point-treatment settings: a simulation study.
Hossain MB; Mosquera L; Karim ME
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Feb; 22(1):46. PubMed ID: 35172746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
