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 *

226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32946418)

  • 1. Summarizing causal differences in survival curves in the presence of unmeasured confounding.
    Martínez-Camblor P; MacKenzie TA; Staiger DO; Goodney PP; O'Malley AJ
    Int J Biostat; 2020 Sep; 17(2):223-240. PubMed ID: 32946418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Bias in estimating the causal hazard ratio when using two-stage instrumental variable methods.
    Wan F; Small D; Bekelman JE; Mitra N
    Stat Med; 2015 Jun; 34(14):2235-65. PubMed ID: 25800789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Unifying instrumental variable and inverse probability weighting approaches for inference of causal treatment effect and unmeasured confounding in observational studies.
    Liu T; Hogan JW
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Mar; 30(3):671-686. PubMed ID: 33213292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Adjustment for time-dependent unmeasured confounders in marginal structural Cox models using validation sample data.
    Burne RM; Abrahamowicz M
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 Feb; 28(2):357-371. PubMed ID: 28835193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Bespoke Instruments: A new tool for addressing unmeasured confounders.
    Richardson DB; Tchetgen Tchetgen EJ
    Am J Epidemiol; 2022 Mar; 191(5):939-947. PubMed ID: 34907434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Estimating population-averaged hazard ratios in the presence of unmeasured confounding.
    Martínez-Camblor P; MacKenzie TA; O'Malley AJ
    Int J Biostat; 2023 May; 19(1):39-52. PubMed ID: 35320637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A general approach to evaluating the bias of 2-stage instrumental variable estimators.
    Wan F; Small D; Mitra N
    Stat Med; 2018 May; 37(12):1997-2015. PubMed ID: 29572890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. How unmeasured confounding in a competing risks setting can affect treatment effect estimates in observational studies.
    Barrowman MA; Peek N; Lambie M; Martin GP; Sperrin M
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jul; 19(1):166. PubMed ID: 31366331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sensitivity analysis of treatment effect to unmeasured confounding in observational studies with survival and competing risks outcomes.
    Huang R; Xu R; Dulai PS
    Stat Med; 2020 Oct; 39(24):3397-3411. PubMed ID: 32677758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 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. Adjusting for bias introduced by instrumental variable estimation in the Cox proportional hazards model.
    Martínez-Camblor P; Mackenzie T; Staiger DO; Goodney PP; O'Malley AJ
    Biostatistics; 2019 Jan; 20(1):80-96. PubMed ID: 29267847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Probe variables: a tool for identification of unmeasured confounders in an observational study].
    Hong X; Yin JC; Wang B
    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi; 2021 Apr; 42(4):735-739. PubMed ID: 34814460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The impact of residual and unmeasured confounding in epidemiologic studies: a simulation study.
    Fewell Z; Davey Smith G; Sterne JA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2007 Sep; 166(6):646-55. PubMed ID: 17615092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Causal directed acyclic graphs and the direction of unmeasured confounding bias.
    VanderWeele TJ; Hernán MA; Robins JM
    Epidemiology; 2008 Sep; 19(5):720-8. PubMed ID: 18633331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessing the impact of unmeasured confounders for credible and reliable real-world evidence.
    Zhang X; Stamey JD; Mathur MB
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2020 Oct; 29(10):1219-1227. PubMed ID: 32929830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Sensitivity analyses of unmeasured and partially-measured confounders using multiple imputation in a vaccine safety study.
    Xu S; Clarke CL; Newcomer SR; Daley MF; Glanz JM
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2021 Sep; 30(9):1200-1213. PubMed ID: 33988275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.