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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34851951)

  • 1. Using Facebook data to predict the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
    Chang KC; Chiang CF; Lin MJ
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(12):e0253560. PubMed ID: 34851951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Toward a Developmental Science of Politics.
    Patterson MM; Bigler RS; Pahlke E; Brown CS; Hayes AR; Ramirez MC; Nelson A
    Monogr Soc Res Child Dev; 2019 Sep; 84(3):7-185. PubMed ID: 31503346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Social media popularity and election results: A study of the 2016 Taiwanese general election.
    Zhang X
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0208190. PubMed ID: 30485347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Electoral College bias and the 2020 presidential election.
    Erikson RS; Sigman K; Yao L
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2020 Nov; 117(45):27940-27944. PubMed ID: 33106408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sexism, racism, and nationalism: Factors associated with the 2016 U.S. presidential election results?
    Shook NJ; Fitzgerald HN; Boggs ST; Ford CG; Hopkins PD; Silva NM
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0229432. PubMed ID: 32150550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Gains in health insurance coverage explain variation in Democratic vote share in the 2008-2016 presidential elections.
    Hollingsworth A; Soni A; Carroll AE; Cawley J; Simon K
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(4):e0214206. PubMed ID: 30946752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Forensic analysis of the Turkey 2023 presidential election reveals extreme vote swings in remote areas.
    Klimek P; Aykaç A; Thurner S
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(11):e0293239. PubMed ID: 37967045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Symbolic disempowerment and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential election: Mental health responses among Latinx and white populations.
    Morey BN; García SJ; Nieri T; Bruckner TA; Link BG
    Soc Sci Med; 2021 Nov; 289():114417. PubMed ID: 34656819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. (Un)happiness and voting in U.S. presidential elections.
    Ward G; De Neve JE; Ungar LH; Eichstaedt JC
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2021 Feb; 120(2):370-383. PubMed ID: 32700960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Demographic change and the 2016 presidential election.
    Maggio C
    Soc Sci Res; 2021 Mar; 95():102459. PubMed ID: 33653583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Significance of likes: Analysing passive interactions on Facebook during campaigning.
    Khairuddin MA; Rao A
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(6):e0179435. PubMed ID: 28622350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Improving Predictive Accuracy in Elections.
    Sathiaraj D; Cassidy WM; Rohli E
    Big Data; 2017 Dec; 5(4):325-336. PubMed ID: 29235914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Nursing Organizations' Health Policy Content on Facebook and Twitter Preceding the 2016 United States Presidential Election.
    Waddell A
    J Adv Nurs; 2019 Jan; 75(1):119-128. PubMed ID: 30109719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measuring relative opinion from location-based social media: A case study of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
    Gong Z; Cai T; Thill JC; Hale S; Graham M
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(5):e0233660. PubMed ID: 32442212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Social influence and political mobilization: Further evidence from a randomized experiment in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.
    Jones JJ; Bond RM; Bakshy E; Eckles D; Fowler JH
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(4):e0173851. PubMed ID: 28445476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A note on internet use and the 2016 U.S. presidential election outcome.
    Boxell L; Gentzkow M; Shapiro JM
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(7):e0199571. PubMed ID: 30020953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 280 characters to the White House: predicting 2020 U.S. presidential elections from twitter data.
    Rizk R; Rizk D; Rizk F; Hsu S
    Comput Math Organ Theory; 2023 Mar; ():1-28. PubMed ID: 37360912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of Facebook and Instagram on the 2020 election: A deactivation experiment.
    Allcott H; Gentzkow M; Mason W; Wilkins A; Barberá P; Brown T; Cisneros JC; Crespo-Tenorio A; Dimmery D; Freelon D; González-Bailón S; Guess AM; Kim YM; Lazer D; Malhotra N; Moehler D; Nair-Desai S; Nait El Barj H; Nyhan B; Paixao de Queiroz AC; Pan J; Settle J; Thorson E; Tromble R; Velasco Rivera C; Wittenbrink B; Wojcieszak M; Zahedian S; Franco A; Kiewiet de Jonge C; Stroud NJ; Tucker JA
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2024 May; 121(21):e2321584121. PubMed ID: 38739793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diverging Life Expectancies and Voting Patterns in the 2016 US Presidential Election.
    Bor J
    Am J Public Health; 2017 Oct; 107(10):1560-1562. PubMed ID: 28817322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using "Big Data" Versus Alternative Measures of Aggregate Data to Predict the U.S. 2016 Presidential Election.
    Ma-Kellams C; Bishop B; Zhang MF; Villagrana B
    Psychol Rep; 2018 Aug; 121(4):726-735. PubMed ID: 29298630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.