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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35373454)

  • 1. Eliciting judgements about dependent quantities of interest: The SHeffield ELicitation Framework extension and copula methods illustrated using an asthma case study.
    Holzhauer B; Hampson LV; Gosling JP; Bornkamp B; Kahn J; Lange MR; Luo WL; Brindicci C; Lawrence D; Ballerstedt S; O'Hagan A
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Sep; 21(5):1005-1021. PubMed ID: 35373454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Developing a reference protocol for structured expert elicitation in health-care decision-making: a mixed-methods study.
    Bojke L; Soares M; Claxton K; Colson A; Fox A; Jackson C; Jankovic D; Morton A; Sharples L; Taylor A
    Health Technol Assess; 2021 Jun; 25(37):1-124. PubMed ID: 34105510
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Balancing the Elicitation Burden and the Richness of Expert Input When Quantifying Discrete Bayesian Networks.
    Barons MJ; Mascaro S; Hanea AM
    Risk Anal; 2022 Jun; 42(6):1196-1234. PubMed ID: 34146431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Remote, real-time expert elicitation to determine the prior probability distribution for Bayesian sample size determination in international randomised controlled trials: Bronchiolitis in Infants Placebo Versus Epinephrine and Dexamethasone (BIPED) study.
    Lan J; Plint AC; Dalziel SR; Klassen TP; Offringa M; Heath A;
    Trials; 2022 Apr; 23(1):279. PubMed ID: 35410375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Methods to elicit probability distributions from experts: a systematic review of reported practice in health technology assessment.
    Grigore B; Peters J; Hyde C; Stein K
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Nov; 31(11):991-1003. PubMed ID: 24105473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Better decision making in drug development through adoption of formal prior elicitation.
    Dallow N; Best N; Montague TH
    Pharm Stat; 2018 Jul; 17(4):301-316. PubMed ID: 29603614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Proposal for a Five-Step Method to Elicit Expert Judgment.
    Veen D; Stoel D; Zondervan-Zwijnenburg M; van de Schoot R
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():2110. PubMed ID: 29259569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Application and Evaluation of an Expert Judgment Elicitation Procedure for Correlations.
    Zondervan-Zwijnenburg M; van de Schoot-Hubeek W; Lek K; Hoijtink H; van de Schoot R
    Front Psychol; 2017; 8():90. PubMed ID: 28197115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of two methods for expert elicitation in health technology assessments.
    Grigore B; Peters J; Hyde C; Stein K
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Jul; 16():85. PubMed ID: 27456844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Expert agreement in prior elicitation and its effects on Bayesian inference.
    Stefan AM; Katsimpokis D; Gronau QF; Wagenmakers EJ
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2022 Oct; 29(5):1776-1794. PubMed ID: 35378671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Elicitation of prior probability distributions for a proposed Bayesian randomized clinical trial of whole blood for trauma resuscitation.
    Jansen JO; Wang H; Holcomb JB; Harvin JA; Richman J; Avritscher E; Stephens SW; Truong VTT; Marques MB; DeSantis SM; Yamal JM; Pedroza C
    Transfusion; 2020 Mar; 60(3):498-506. PubMed ID: 31970796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An internet-based method to elicit experts' beliefs for Bayesian priors: a case study in intracranial stent evaluation.
    Pibouleau L; Chevret S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2014 Oct; 30(4):446-53. PubMed ID: 25401304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Practical challenges and methodological flexibility in prior elicitation.
    Stefan AM; Evans NJ; Wagenmakers EJ
    Psychol Methods; 2022 Apr; 27(2):177-197. PubMed ID: 32940511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Combining experts' judgments: comparison of algorithmic methods using synthetic data.
    Hammitt JK; Zhang Y
    Risk Anal; 2013 Jan; 33(1):109-20. PubMed ID: 22583060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improving the assessment of the probability of success in late stage drug development.
    Hampson LV; Bornkamp B; Holzhauer B; Kahn J; Lange MR; Luo WL; Cioppa GD; Stott K; Ballerstedt S
    Pharm Stat; 2022 Mar; 21(2):439-459. PubMed ID: 34907654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Informing Reimbursement Decisions Using Cost-Effectiveness Modelling: A Guide to the Process of Generating Elicited Priors to Capture Model Uncertainties.
    Bojke L; Grigore B; Jankovic D; Peters J; Soares M; Stein K
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2017 Sep; 35(9):867-877. PubMed ID: 28616775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reference Case Methods for Expert Elicitation in Health Care Decision Making.
    Bojke L; Soares MO; Claxton K; Colson A; Fox A; Jackson C; Jankovic D; Morton A; Sharples LD; Taylor A
    Med Decis Making; 2022 Feb; 42(2):182-193. PubMed ID: 34271832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using expert knowledge to support Endangered Species Act decision-making for data-deficient species.
    Fitzgerald DB; Smith DR; Culver DC; Feller D; Fong DW; Hajenga J; Niemiller ML; Nolfi DC; Orndorff WD; Douglas B; Maloney KO; Young JA
    Conserv Biol; 2021 Oct; 35(5):1627-1638. PubMed ID: 33471375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Development of a practical approach to expert elicitation for randomised controlled trials with missing health outcomes: Application to the IMPROVE trial.
    Mason AJ; Gomes M; Grieve R; Ulug P; Powell JT; Carpenter J
    Clin Trials; 2017 Aug; 14(4):357-367. PubMed ID: 28675302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Modeling of experts' divergent prior beliefs for a sequential phase III clinical trial.
    Moatti M; Zohar S; Facon T; Moreau P; Mary JY; Chevret S
    Clin Trials; 2013 Aug; 10(4):505-14. PubMed ID: 23820061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.