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 *

309 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33150645)

  • 1. Confounder selection strategies targeting stable treatment effect estimators.
    Loh WW; Vansteelandt S
    Stat Med; 2021 Feb; 40(3):607-630. PubMed ID: 33150645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Data-driven covariate selection for confounding adjustment by focusing on the stability of the effect estimator.
    Loh WW; Ren D
    Psychol Methods; 2024 Oct; 29(5):947-966. PubMed ID: 37104763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quantifying the bias due to observed individual confounders in causal treatment effect estimates.
    Parast L; Griffin BA
    Stat Med; 2020 Aug; 39(18):2447-2476. PubMed ID: 32388870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. On model selection and model misspecification in causal inference.
    Vansteelandt S; Bekaert M; Claeskens G
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2012 Feb; 21(1):7-30. PubMed ID: 21075803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of the ability of double-robust estimators to correct bias in propensity score matching analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation study.
    Nguyen TL; Collins GS; Spence J; Devereaux PJ; Daurès JP; Landais P; Le Manach Y
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2017 Dec; 26(12):1513-1519. PubMed ID: 28984050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Consistent causal effect estimation under dual misspecification and implications for confounder selection procedures.
    Gruber S; van der Laan MJ
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2015 Dec; 24(6):1003-8. PubMed ID: 22368176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Outcome-adaptive lasso: Variable selection for causal inference.
    Shortreed SM; Ertefaie A
    Biometrics; 2017 Dec; 73(4):1111-1122. PubMed ID: 28273693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Model misspecification and robustness in causal inference: comparing matching with doubly robust estimation.
    Waernbaum I
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(15):1572-81. PubMed ID: 22359267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Model misspecification and bias for inverse probability weighting estimators of average causal effects.
    Waernbaum I; Pazzagli L
    Biom J; 2023 Feb; 65(2):e2100118. PubMed ID: 36045099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prognostic score-based model averaging approach for propensity score estimation.
    Kabata D; Stuart EA; Shintani A
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Oct; 24(1):228. PubMed ID: 39363252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Ultra-high dimensional variable selection for doubly robust causal inference.
    Tang D; Kong D; Pan W; Wang L
    Biometrics; 2023 Jun; 79(2):903-914. PubMed ID: 35043393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How to obtain valid tests and confidence intervals after propensity score variable selection?
    Dukes O; Vansteelandt S
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Mar; 29(3):677-694. PubMed ID: 31385558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The impact of moderator by confounder interactions in the assessment of treatment effect modification: a simulation study.
    Marsden AM; Dixon WG; Dunn G; Emsley R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Apr; 22(1):88. PubMed ID: 35369866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Safety surveillance and the estimation of risk in select populations: Flexible methods to control for confounding while targeting marginal comparisons via standardization.
    Shi X; Wellman R; Heagerty PJ; Nelson JC; Cook AJ
    Stat Med; 2020 Feb; 39(4):369-386. PubMed ID: 31823406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of confounder selection and adjustment methods for estimating causal effects using large healthcare databases.
    Benasseur I; Talbot D; Durand M; Holbrook A; Matteau A; Potter BJ; Renoux C; Schnitzer ME; Tarride JÉ; Guertin JR
    Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf; 2022 Apr; 31(4):424-433. PubMed ID: 34953160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On variance estimate for covariate adjustment by propensity score analysis.
    Zou B; Zou F; Shuster JJ; Tighe PJ; Koch GG; Zhou H
    Stat Med; 2016 Sep; 35(20):3537-48. PubMed ID: 26999553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Doubly robust matching estimators for high dimensional confounding adjustment.
    Antonelli J; Cefalu M; Palmer N; Agniel D
    Biometrics; 2018 Dec; 74(4):1171-1179. PubMed ID: 29750844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. When does measurement error in covariates impact causal effect estimates? Analytic derivations of different scenarios and an empirical illustration.
    Sengewald MA; Steiner PM; Pohl S
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2019 May; 72(2):244-270. PubMed ID: 30345554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Propensity Score-Based Estimators With Multiple Error-Prone Covariates.
    Hong H; Aaby DA; Siddique J; Stuart EA
    Am J Epidemiol; 2019 Jan; 188(1):222-230. PubMed ID: 30358801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Model averaged double robust estimation.
    Cefalu M; Dominici F; Arvold N; Parmigiani G
    Biometrics; 2017 Jun; 73(2):410-421. PubMed ID: 27893927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.