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: 36733223)

  • 1. Heterogeneous heterogeneity by default: Testing categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis.
    Rodriguez JE; Williams DR; Bürkner PC
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2023 May; 76(2):402-433. PubMed ID: 36733223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Analysis of categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis: Consequences of using pooled versus separate estimates of the residual between-studies variances.
    Rubio-Aparicio M; Sánchez-Meca J; López-López JA; Botella J; Marín-Martínez F
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2017 Nov; 70(3):439-456. PubMed ID: 28164265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A Meta-Meta-Analysis: Empirical Review of Statistical Power, Type I Error Rates, Effect Sizes, and Model Selection of Meta-Analyses Published in Psychology.
    Cafri G; Kromrey JD; Brannick MT
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2010 Mar; 45(2):239-70. PubMed ID: 26760285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Appropriate statistical methods for analysing partially nested randomised controlled trials with continuous outcomes: a simulation study.
    Candlish J; Teare MD; Dimairo M; Flight L; Mandefield L; Walters SJ
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Oct; 18(1):105. PubMed ID: 30314463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A flexible approach to identify interaction effects between moderators in meta-analysis.
    Li X; Dusseldorp E; Meulman JJ
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):134-152. PubMed ID: 30511514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of procedures to test for moderators in mixed-effects meta-regression models.
    Viechtbauer W; López-López JA; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F
    Psychol Methods; 2015 Sep; 20(3):360-74. PubMed ID: 25110905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Applications of simple and accessible methods for meta-analysis involving rare events: A simulation study.
    Hodkinson A; Kontopantelis E
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2021 Jul; 30(7):1589-1608. PubMed ID: 34139915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A simulation study to compare robust tests for linear mixed-effects meta-regression.
    Welz T; Pauly M
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 May; 11(3):331-342. PubMed ID: 31930705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Real world scenarios in rare variant association analysis: the impact of imbalance and sample size on the power in silico.
    Zhang X; Basile AO; Pendergrass SA; Ritchie MD
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2019 Jan; 20(1):46. PubMed ID: 30669967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analysis of covariance with pre-treatment measurements in randomized trials: comparison of equal and unequal slopes.
    Funatogawa I; Funatogawa T
    Biom J; 2011 Sep; 53(5):810-21. PubMed ID: 21887795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Consequences of choosing samples in hypothesis testing to ensure homogeneity of variance.
    Zimmerman DW
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2014 Feb; 67(1):1-29. PubMed ID: 23330909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Meta-analysis with missing study-level sample variance data.
    Chowdhry AK; Dworkin RH; McDermott MP
    Stat Med; 2016 Jul; 35(17):3021-32. PubMed ID: 26888093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Meta-analysis of ratios of sample variances.
    Prendergast LA; Staudte RG
    Stat Med; 2016 May; 35(11):1780-99. PubMed ID: 27062644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Separating Measurement Error and Signal in Environmental Data: Use of Replicates to Address Uncertainty.
    Furman M; Thomas KW; George BJ
    Environ Sci Technol; 2023 Oct; 57(41):15356-15365. PubMed ID: 37796641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using multiple group modeling to test moderators in meta-analysis.
    Schoemann AM
    Res Synth Methods; 2016 Dec; 7(4):387-401. PubMed ID: 27936303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Multiple moderator meta-analysis using the R-package Meta-CART.
    Li X; Dusseldorp E; Su X; Meulman JJ
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Dec; 52(6):2657-2673. PubMed ID: 32542441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cluster wild bootstrapping to handle dependent effect sizes in meta-analysis with a small number of studies.
    Joshi M; Pustejovsky JE; Beretvas SN
    Res Synth Methods; 2022 Jul; 13(4):457-477. PubMed ID: 35218309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.