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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38037262)

  • 1. A REML method for the evidence-splitting model in network meta-analysis.
    Piepho HP; Forkman J; Malik WA
    Res Synth Methods; 2024 Mar; 15(2):198-212. PubMed ID: 38037262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison via simulation of least squares Lehmann-Scheffé estimators of two variances and heritability with those of restricted maximum likelihood.
    Slanger WD; Carlson JK
    J Anim Sci; 2003 Aug; 81(8):1950-8. PubMed ID: 12926777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Estimating the variance for heterogeneity in arm-based network meta-analysis.
    Piepho HP; Madden LV; Roger J; Payne R; Williams ER
    Pharm Stat; 2018 May; 17(3):264-277. PubMed ID: 29676023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Node-Splitting Generalized Linear Mixed Models for Evaluation of Inconsistency in Network Meta-Analysis.
    Yu-Kang T
    Value Health; 2016 Dec; 19(8):957-963. PubMed ID: 27987646
    [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. Clinical heterogeneity in random-effect meta-analysis: Between-study boundary estimate problem.
    Yoneoka D; Henmi M
    Stat Med; 2019 Sep; 38(21):4131-4145. PubMed ID: 31286537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. An evidence-splitting approach to evaluation of direct-indirect evidence inconsistency in network meta-analysis.
    Shih MC; Tu YK
    Res Synth Methods; 2021 Mar; 12(2):226-238. PubMed ID: 33543575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Multilevel bootstrap analysis with assumptions violated.
    Vallejo Seco G; Ato García M; Fernández García MP; Livacic Rojas PE
    Psicothema; 2013; 25(4):520-8. PubMed ID: 24124787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Performance of model-based network meta-analysis (MBNMA) of time-course relationships: A simulation study.
    Pedder H; Boucher M; Dias S; Bennetts M; Welton NJ
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 Sep; 11(5):678-697. PubMed ID: 32662206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Extended information criterion (EIC) approach for linear mixed effects models under restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimation.
    Yafune A; Funatogawa T; Ishiguro M
    Stat Med; 2005 Nov; 24(22):3417-29. PubMed ID: 16237658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluating the performance of Bayesian and restricted maximum likelihood estimation for stepped wedge cluster randomized trials with a small number of clusters.
    Grantham KL; Kasza J; Heritier S; Carlin JB; Forbes AB
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2022 Apr; 22(1):112. PubMed ID: 35418034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Estimation Methods for Mixed Logistic Models with Few Clusters.
    McNeish D
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2016; 51(6):790-804. PubMed ID: 27802068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Meta-analysis of binary outcomes via generalized linear mixed models: a simulation study.
    Bakbergenuly I; Kulinskaya E
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Jul; 18(1):70. PubMed ID: 29973146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantifying indirect evidence in network meta-analysis.
    Noma H; Tanaka S; Matsui S; Cipriani A; Furukawa TA
    Stat Med; 2017 Mar; 36(6):917-927. PubMed ID: 27917493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of bootstrap approaches for estimating uncertainty of parameters in linear mixed-effects models.
    Thai HT; Mentré F; Holford NH; Veyrat-Follet C; Comets E
    Pharm Stat; 2013; 12(3):129-40. PubMed ID: 23457061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.