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.
192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35485582)
1. Parametric G-computation for compatible indirect treatment comparisons with limited individual patient data. Remiro-Azócar A; Heath A; Baio G Res Synth Methods; 2022 Nov; 13(6):716-744. PubMed ID: 35485582 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Model-based standardization using multiple imputation. Remiro-Azócar A; Heath A; Baio G BMC Med Res Methodol; 2024 Feb; 24(1):32. PubMed ID: 38341552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Methods for population adjustment with limited access to individual patient data: A review and simulation study. Remiro-Azócar A; Heath A; Baio G Res Synth Methods; 2021 Nov; 12(6):750-775. PubMed ID: 34196111 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Two-stage matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Remiro-Azócar A BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Aug; 22(1):217. PubMed ID: 35941551 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of Adjusted and Unadjusted Indirect Comparison Methods in Benefit Assessment. A Simulation Study for Time-to-event Endpoints. Kühnast S; Schiffner-Rohe J; Rahnenführer J; Leverkus F Methods Inf Med; 2017 May; 56(3):261-267. PubMed ID: 28361159 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assessing the performance of population adjustment methods for anchored indirect comparisons: A simulation study. Phillippo DM; Dias S; Ades AE; Welton NJ Stat Med; 2020 Dec; 39(30):4885-4911. PubMed ID: 33015906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The performance of different propensity score methods for estimating marginal hazard ratios. Austin PC Stat Med; 2013 Jul; 32(16):2837-49. PubMed ID: 23239115 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Ozanimod and Dimethyl Fumarate for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Using Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison. Cohan S; Kumar J; Arndorfer S; Zhu X; Zivkovic M; Tencer T CNS Drugs; 2021 Jul; 35(7):795-804. PubMed ID: 33847901 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The Effects of Model Misspecification in Unanchored Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison: Results of a Simulation Study. Hatswell AJ; Freemantle N; Baio G Value Health; 2020 Jun; 23(6):751-759. PubMed ID: 32540233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. On the double-robustness and semiparametric efficiency of matching-adjusted indirect comparisons. Cheng D; Tchetgen ET; Signorovitch J Res Synth Methods; 2023 May; 14(3):438-442. PubMed ID: 36537355 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Propensity score applied to survival data analysis through proportional hazards models: a Monte Carlo study. Gayat E; Resche-Rigon M; Mary JY; Porcher R Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(3):222-9. PubMed ID: 22411785 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Equivalence of entropy balancing and the method of moments for matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Phillippo DM; Dias S; Ades AE; Welton NJ Res Synth Methods; 2020 Jul; 11(4):568-572. PubMed ID: 32395870 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A comprehensive review and shiny application on the matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Jiang Z; Cappelleri JC; Gamalo M; Chen Y; Thomas N; Chu H Res Synth Methods; 2024 Jul; 15(4):671-686. PubMed ID: 38380799 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Alternative weighting schemes when performing matching-adjusted indirect comparisons. Jackson D; Rhodes K; Ouwens M Res Synth Methods; 2021 May; 12(3):333-346. PubMed ID: 33131206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An evaluation of bias in propensity score-adjusted non-linear regression models. Wan F; Mitra N Stat Methods Med Res; 2018 Mar; 27(3):846-862. PubMed ID: 27095754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bias associated with using the estimated propensity score as a regression covariate. Hade EM; Lu B Stat Med; 2014 Jan; 33(1):74-87. PubMed ID: 23787715 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Estimation of causal effects of multiple treatments in observational studies with a binary outcome. Hu L; Gu C; Lopez M; Ji J; Wisnivesky J Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Nov; 29(11):3218-3234. PubMed ID: 32450775 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Conditioning on the propensity score can result in biased estimation of common measures of treatment effect: a Monte Carlo study. Austin PC; Grootendorst P; Normand SL; Anderson GM Stat Med; 2007 Feb; 26(4):754-68. PubMed ID: 16783757 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Bayesian adjustment for covariate measurement errors: a flexible parametric approach. Hossain S; Gustafson P Stat Med; 2009 May; 28(11):1580-600. PubMed ID: 19226564 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]