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 *

201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34716528)

  • 1. Power(ful) myths: misconceptions regarding sample size in quality of life research.
    Anderson SF
    Qual Life Res; 2022 Oct; 31(10):2917-2929. PubMed ID: 34716528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Best (but oft forgotten) practices: sample size planning for powerful studies.
    Anderson SF
    Am J Clin Nutr; 2019 Aug; 110(2):280-295. PubMed ID: 31131390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Researchers' Intuitions About Power in Psychological Research.
    Bakker M; Hartgerink CH; Wicherts JM; van der Maas HL
    Psychol Sci; 2016 Aug; 27(8):1069-77. PubMed ID: 27354203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sample size and power estimation for studies with health related quality of life outcomes: a comparison of four methods using the SF-36.
    Walters SJ
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2004 May; 2():26. PubMed ID: 15161494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Methodological reporting behavior, sample sizes, and statistical power in studies of event-related potentials: Barriers to reproducibility and replicability.
    Clayson PE; Carbine KA; Baldwin SA; Larson MJ
    Psychophysiology; 2019 Nov; 56(11):e13437. PubMed ID: 31322285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The use of bootstrap methods for estimating sample size and analysing health-related quality of life outcomes.
    Walters SJ; Campbell MJ
    Stat Med; 2005 Apr; 24(7):1075-102. PubMed ID: 15570625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Statistical power and optimal design in experiments in which samples of participants respond to samples of stimuli.
    Westfall J; Kenny DA; Judd CM
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2014 Oct; 143(5):2020-45. PubMed ID: 25111580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Statistical power and sample size calculations: A primer for pediatric surgeons.
    Staffa SJ; Zurakowski D
    J Pediatr Surg; 2020 Jul; 55(7):1173-1179. PubMed ID: 31155391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Authorship: Few Myths and Misconceptions.
    Menezes RG; Kharoshah MA; Madadin M; Marakala V; Lasrado S; Al Tamimi DM
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2016 Dec; 22(6):1843-1847. PubMed ID: 26670920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Planning Implications Related to Sterilization-Sensitive Science Investigations Associated with Mars Sample Return (MSR).
    Velbel MA; Cockell CS; Glavin DP; Marty B; Regberg AB; Smith AL; Tosca NJ; Wadhwa M; Kminek G; Meyer MA; Beaty DW; Carrier BL; Haltigin T; Hays LE; Agee CB; Busemann H; Cavalazzi B; Debaille V; Grady MM; Hauber E; Hutzler A; McCubbin FM; Pratt LM; Smith CL; Summons RE; Swindle TD; Tait KT; Udry A; Usui T; Westall F; Zorzano MP
    Astrobiology; 2022 Jun; 22(S1):S112-S164. PubMed ID: 34904892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Sample size determination and power analysis using the G*Power software.
    Kang H
    J Educ Eval Health Prof; 2021; 18():17. PubMed ID: 34325496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Methodological and conceptual issues regarding occupational psychosocial coronary heart disease epidemiology.
    Burr H; Formazin M; Pohrt A
    Scand J Work Environ Health; 2016 May; 42(3):251-5. PubMed ID: 26960179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Computing individual and collective ethical utility for optimally planning phase III trials.
    De Capitani L; De Martini D
    Biom J; 2018 Nov; 60(6):1121-1134. PubMed ID: 30209817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sample size determination in medical and surgical research.
    Flikkema RM; Toledo-Pereyra LH
    J Invest Surg; 2012 Feb; 25(1):3-7. PubMed ID: 22272631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) review.
    Cook JA; Hislop J; Adewuyi TE; Harrild K; Altman DG; Ramsay CR; Fraser C; Buckley B; Fayers P; Harvey I; Briggs AH; Norrie JD; Fergusson D; Ford I; Vale LD
    Health Technol Assess; 2014 May; 18(28):v-vi, 1-175. PubMed ID: 24806703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Seven ways to increase power without increasing N.
    Hansen WB; Collins LM
    NIDA Res Monogr; 1994; 142():184-95. PubMed ID: 9243537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An N-pact factor for clinical psychological research.
    Reardon KW; Smack AJ; Herzhoff K; Tackett JL
    J Abnorm Psychol; 2019 Aug; 128(6):493-499. PubMed ID: 31368728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Implications of the minimal clinically important difference for health-related quality-of-life outcomes: a comparison of sample size requirements for an incontinence treatment trial.
    Halme AS; Fritel X; Benedetti A; Eng K; Tannenbaum C
    Value Health; 2015 Mar; 18(2):292-8. PubMed ID: 25773565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.