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 *

192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34886897)

  • 1. A likelihood ratio test for the homogeneity of between-study variance in network meta-analysis.
    Hu D; Wang C; O'Connor AM
    Syst Rev; 2021 Dec; 10(1):310. PubMed ID: 34886897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A variance shrinkage method improves arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis.
    Wang Z; Lin L; Hodges JS; MacLehose R; Chu H
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Jan; 30(1):151-165. PubMed ID: 32757707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Network meta-analysis of rare events using the Mantel-Haenszel method.
    Efthimiou O; Rücker G; Schwarzer G; Higgins JPT; Egger M; Salanti G
    Stat Med; 2019 Jul; 38(16):2992-3012. PubMed ID: 30997687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Testing moderation in network meta-analysis with individual participant data.
    Dagne GA; Brown CH; Howe G; Kellam SG; Liu L
    Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(15):2485-502. PubMed ID: 26841367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Paule-Mandel estimators for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects.
    Jackson D; Veroniki AA; Law M; Tricco AC; Baker R
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Dec; 8(4):416-434. PubMed ID: 28585257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A simulation study to compare different estimation approaches for network meta-analysis and corresponding methods to evaluate the consistency assumption.
    Kiefer C; Sturtz S; Bender R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 Feb; 20(1):36. PubMed ID: 32093605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bartlett-type corrections and bootstrap adjustments of likelihood-based inference methods for network meta-analysis.
    Noma H; Nagashima K; Maruo K; Gosho M; Furukawa TA
    Stat Med; 2018 Mar; 37(7):1178-1190. PubMed ID: 29250816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A matrix-based method of moments for fitting multivariate network meta-analysis models with multiple outcomes and random inconsistency effects.
    Jackson D; Bujkiewicz S; Law M; Riley RD; White IR
    Biometrics; 2018 Jun; 74(2):548-556. PubMed ID: 28806485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Network meta-analysis of rare events using penalized likelihood regression.
    Evrenoglou T; White IR; Afach S; Mavridis D; Chaimani A
    Stat Med; 2022 Nov; 41(26):5203-5219. PubMed ID: 36054668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A design-by-treatment interaction model for network meta-analysis and meta-regression with integrated nested Laplace approximations.
    Günhan BK; Friede T; Held L
    Res Synth Methods; 2018 Jun; 9(2):179-194. PubMed ID: 29193801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Two new methods to fit models for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects.
    Law M; Jackson D; Turner R; Rhodes K; Viechtbauer W
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Jul; 16():87. PubMed ID: 27465416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. ANOVA and the variance homogeneity assumption: Exploring a better gatekeeper.
    Kim YJ; Cribbie RA
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2018 Feb; 71(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 28568313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing meta-regression methods for examining moderator relationships with dependent effect sizes: A Monte Carlo simulation.
    López-López JA; Van den Noortgate W; Tanner-Smith EE; Wilson SJ; Lipsey MW
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Dec; 8(4):435-450. PubMed ID: 28556477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Adjusted closed-form confidence interval formulas for network meta-analysis with a small number of studies.
    Kojima M
    Stat Med; 2023 Feb; 42(4):457-469. PubMed ID: 36539211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Characteristics of a loop of evidence that affect detection and estimation of inconsistency: a simulation study.
    Veroniki AA; Mavridis D; Higgins JP; Salanti G
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2014 Sep; 14():106. PubMed ID: 25239546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Bayesian network meta-regression hierarchical models using heavy-tailed multivariate random effects with covariate-dependent variances.
    Li H; Lim D; Chen MH; Ibrahim JG; Kim S; Shah AK; Lin J
    Stat Med; 2021 Jul; 40(15):3582-3603. PubMed ID: 33846992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Jackson D; Bowden J; Veroniki AA; Kontopantelis E; Viechtbauer W; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):83-98. PubMed ID: 30067315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Network Meta-Analysis.
    Watt J; Del Giovane C
    Methods Mol Biol; 2022; 2345():187-201. PubMed ID: 34550592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis.
    Viechtbauer W
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2007 May; 60(Pt 1):29-60. PubMed ID: 17535578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.