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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35927373)

  • 1. Variability and uncertainty: interpretation and usage of pharmacometric simulations and intervals.
    Hu C
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2022 Oct; 49(5):487-491. PubMed ID: 35927373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Confidence and Prediction Intervals for Pharmacometric Models.
    Kümmel A; Bonate PL; Dingemanse J; Krause A
    CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol; 2018 Jun; 7(6):360-373. PubMed ID: 29388347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A quantitative approach to the choice of number of samples for percentile estimation in bootstrap and visual predictive check analyses.
    Jonsson EN; Nyberg J
    CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol; 2022 Jun; 11(6):673-686. PubMed ID: 35353958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing parameter uncertainty in small-n pharmacometric analyses: value of the log-likelihood profiling-based sampling importance resampling (LLP-SIR) technique.
    Broeker A; Wicha SG
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2020 Jun; 47(3):219-228. PubMed ID: 32248328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Regression Approach to Visual Predictive Checks for Population Pharmacometric Models.
    Jamsen KM; Patel K; Nieforth K; Kirkpatrick CMJ
    CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol; 2018 Oct; 7(10):678-686. PubMed ID: 30058222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Using forest plots to interpret covariate effects in pharmacometric models.
    Jonsson EN; Nyberg J
    CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol; 2024 May; 13(5):743-758. PubMed ID: 38415822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Covariate selection in pharmacometric analyses: a review of methods.
    Hutmacher MM; Kowalski KG
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2015 Jan; 79(1):132-47. PubMed ID: 24962797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Approaches for modeling within subject variability in pharmacometric count data analysis: dynamic inter-occasion variability and stochastic differential equations.
    Deng C; Plan EL; Karlsson MO
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2016 Jun; 43(3):305-14. PubMed ID: 27165151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Pharmacometric estimation methods for aggregate data, including data simulated from other pharmacometric models.
    Välitalo PAJ
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn; 2021 Oct; 48(5):623-638. PubMed ID: 34159497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A probabilistic approach to quantify the impact of uncertainty propagation in musculoskeletal simulations.
    Myers CA; Laz PJ; Shelburne KB; Davidson BS
    Ann Biomed Eng; 2015 May; 43(5):1098-111. PubMed ID: 25404535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Uncertainty quantification in virtual surgery hemodynamics predictions for single ventricle palliation.
    Schiavazzi DE; Arbia G; Baker C; Hlavacek AM; Hsia TY; Marsden AL; Vignon-Clementel IE;
    Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng; 2016 Mar; 32(3):e02737. PubMed ID: 26217878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Interval estimation by simulation as an alternative to and extension of confidence intervals.
    Greenland S
    Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Dec; 33(6):1389-97. PubMed ID: 15319402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparative assessment of parameter estimation methods in the presence of overdispersion: a simulation study.
    Roosa K; Luo R; Chowell G
    Math Biosci Eng; 2019 May; 16(5):4299-4313. PubMed ID: 31499663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. V
    Lommerse J; Plock N; Cheung SYA; Sachs JR
    CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol; 2021 Sep; 10(9):1092-1106. PubMed ID: 34242494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Phxnlme: An R package that facilitates pharmacometric workflow of Phoenix NLME analyses.
    Lim CN; Liang S; Feng K; Chittenden J; Henry A; Mouksassi S; Birnbaum AK
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2017 Mar; 140():121-129. PubMed ID: 28254068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Application of Pharmacometric Analysis in the Design of Clinical Pharmacology Studies for Biosimilar Development.
    Zhu P; Sy SKB; Skerjanec A
    AAPS J; 2018 Mar; 20(2):40. PubMed ID: 29516330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assigning confidence to molecular property prediction.
    Nigam A; Pollice R; Hurley MFD; Hickman RJ; Aldeghi M; Yoshikawa N; Chithrananda S; Voelz VA; Aspuru-Guzik A
    Expert Opin Drug Discov; 2021 Sep; 16(9):1009-1023. PubMed ID: 34126827
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. cLRT-Mod: An efficient methodology for pharmacometric model-based analysis of longitudinal phase II dose finding studies under model uncertainty.
    Buatois S; Ueckert S; Frey N; Retout S; Mentré F
    Stat Med; 2021 May; 40(10):2435-2451. PubMed ID: 33650148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Variability in high-throughput ion-channel screening data and consequences for cardiac safety assessment.
    Elkins RC; Davies MR; Brough SJ; Gavaghan DJ; Cui Y; Abi-Gerges N; Mirams GR
    J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods; 2013; 68(1):112-22. PubMed ID: 23651875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Uncertainty calculation methods in dose assessment for dicentric chromosome assay.
    González JE; Barquinero JF; Holladay BA; Di Giorgio M; Higueras M
    Int J Radiat Biol; 2020 May; 96(5):606-613. PubMed ID: 31986065
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.