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 *

129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38502022)

  • 1. Comparisons of various estimates of the
    Wang Y; DelRocco N; Lin L
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2024 May; 33(5):745-764. PubMed ID: 38502022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Methods for estimating between-study variance and overall effect in meta-analysis of odds ratios.
    Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
    Res Synth Methods; 2020 May; 11(3):426-442. PubMed ID: 32112619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in simulated random-effects meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Jackson D; Bowden J; Veroniki AA; Kontopantelis E; Viechtbauer W; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):83-98. PubMed ID: 30067315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Estimation in meta-analyses of mean difference and standardized mean difference.
    Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
    Stat Med; 2020 Jan; 39(2):171-191. PubMed ID: 31709582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Likelihood-based random-effects meta-analysis with few studies: empirical and simulation studies.
    Seide SE; Röver C; Friede T
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Jan; 19(1):16. PubMed ID: 30634920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. On the Q statistic with constant weights for standardized mean difference.
    Bakbergenuly I; Hoaglin DC; Kulinskaya E
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2022 Nov; 75(3):444-465. PubMed ID: 35094381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Methods to estimate the between-study variance and its uncertainty in meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Viechtbauer W; Bender R; Bowden J; Knapp G; Kuss O; Higgins JP; Langan D; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2016 Mar; 7(1):55-79. PubMed ID: 26332144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An empirical comparison of heterogeneity variance estimators in 12 894 meta-analyses.
    Langan D; Higgins JP; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):195-205. PubMed ID: 26053175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Do statistical heterogeneity methods impact the results of meta- analyses? A meta epidemiological study.
    Mheissen S; Khan H; Normando D; Vaiid N; Flores-Mir C
    PLoS One; 2024; 19(3):e0298526. PubMed ID: 38502662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Interval estimation of the overall treatment effect in random-effects meta-analyses: Recommendations from a simulation study comparing frequentist, Bayesian, and bootstrap methods.
    Weber F; Knapp G; Glass Ä; Kundt G; Ickstadt K
    Res Synth Methods; 2021 May; 12(3):291-315. PubMed ID: 33264488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of 20 heterogeneity variance estimators in statistical synthesis of results from studies: a simulation study.
    Petropoulou M; Mavridis D
    Stat Med; 2017 Nov; 36(27):4266-4280. PubMed ID: 28815652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index?
    Huedo-Medina TB; Sánchez-Meca J; Marín-Martínez F; Botella J
    Psychol Methods; 2006 Jun; 11(2):193-206. PubMed ID: 16784338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative performance of heterogeneity variance estimators in meta-analysis: a review of simulation studies.
    Langan D; Higgins JPT; Simmonds M
    Res Synth Methods; 2017 Jun; 8(2):181-198. PubMed ID: 27060925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Statistical properties of methods based on the Q-statistic for constructing a confidence interval for the between-study variance in meta-analysis.
    van Aert RCM; van Assen MALM; Viechtbauer W
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Jun; 10(2):225-239. PubMed ID: 30589219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A simplification and implementation of random-effects meta-analyses based on the exact distribution of Cochran's Q.
    Preuß M; Ziegler A
    Methods Inf Med; 2014; 53(1):54-61. PubMed ID: 24317521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Misunderstandings about Q and 'Cochran's Q test' in meta-analysis.
    Hoaglin DC
    Stat Med; 2016 Feb; 35(4):485-95. PubMed ID: 26303773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Methods to calculate uncertainty in the estimated overall effect size from a random-effects meta-analysis.
    Veroniki AA; Jackson D; Bender R; Kuss O; Langan D; Higgins JPT; Knapp G; Salanti G
    Res Synth Methods; 2019 Mar; 10(1):23-43. PubMed ID: 30129707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A new measure of between-studies heterogeneity in meta-analysis.
    Crippa A; Khudyakov P; Wang M; Orsini N; Spiegelman D
    Stat Med; 2016 Sep; 35(21):3661-75. PubMed ID: 27161124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Quantifying, displaying and accounting for heterogeneity in the meta-analysis of RCTs using standard and generalised Q statistics.
    Bowden J; Tierney JF; Copas AJ; Burdett S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2011 Apr; 11():41. PubMed ID: 21473747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.