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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6747820)

  • 41. Exact sample-size determination in testing non-inferiority under a simple crossover trial.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    Pharm Stat; 2012; 11(2):129-34. PubMed ID: 22232060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Novel methods to assess bioequivalence.
    Karalis V; Symillides M; Macheras P
    Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol; 2011 Jan; 7(1):79-88. PubMed ID: 21118059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Approximate sample sizes for testing hypotheses about the ratio and difference of two means.
    Kieser M; Hauschke D
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Nov; 9(4):641-50. PubMed ID: 10576408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. What is bioavailability? Philosophy of bioavailability testing.
    Ritschel WA
    Methods Find Exp Clin Pharmacol; 1984 Dec; 6(12):777-86. PubMed ID: 6530912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Sample size determination: extended tables for the multiplicative model and bioequivalence ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43.
    Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992; 30 Suppl 1():S59-62. PubMed ID: 1601533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. A spreadsheet program for simulation of bioequivalence and bioavailability studies.
    Abdallah HY; Ludden TM
    Comput Biol Med; 1995 May; 25(3):349-54. PubMed ID: 7554851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Equivalence in periodontal trials: a description for the clinician.
    Duke SP; Garrett S
    J Periodontol; 1998 Jun; 69(6):650-4. PubMed ID: 9660333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Sample size determination: extended tables for the multiplicative model and bioequivalence ranges of 0.9 to 1.11 and 0.7 to 1.43.
    Diletti E; Hauschke D; Steinijans VW
    Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol; 1992 Aug; 30(8):287-90. PubMed ID: 1526691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Bioequivalence of two commercial preparations of trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole: a randomized, single-dose, single-blind, crossover trial.
    Alonso Campero R; Bernardo Escudero R; Del Cisne Valle Alvarez D; González de la Parra M; Namur Montalvo S; Burke Fraga V; Silva Hernandez R; De Lago Acosta A
    Clin Ther; 2007 Feb; 29(2):326-33. PubMed ID: 17472824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Inherent difficulties with active control equivalence studies.
    Senn S
    Stat Med; 1993 Dec; 12(24):2367-75. PubMed ID: 8134739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. [Feasibility of the in vitro evaluation of bioavailability. 3: Method of operation of a newly-developed absorption model and results obtained with it].
    Fürst W; Neubert R; Stütz B; Fuchs G; Buchmann E
    Pharmazie; 1982 Aug; 37(8):571-7. PubMed ID: 7146065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Examining outlying subjects and outlying records in bioequivalence trials.
    Wang W; Chow SC
    J Biopharm Stat; 2003 Feb; 13(1):43-56. PubMed ID: 12635902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Comparing treatment variances in repeated measures bioavailability trials.
    Jiang G; Sarkar SK
    Stat Med; 1999 May; 18(9):1133-49. PubMed ID: 10378261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Sample size determination for assessing equivalence based on proportion ratio under a randomized trial with non-compliance and missing outcomes.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    Stat Med; 2008 Jan; 27(1):47-67. PubMed ID: 17708514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. On testing equivalence of three populations.
    Wiens BL; Iglewicz B
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Aug; 9(3):465-83. PubMed ID: 10473032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Sequential equivalence testing and repeated confidence intervals, with applications to normal and binary responses.
    Jennison C; Turnbull BW
    Biometrics; 1993 Mar; 49(1):31-43. PubMed ID: 8513110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Inference of equivalence for the ratio of two normal means with unspecified variances.
    Xu S; Hua SY; Menton R; Barker K; Menon S; D'Agostino RB
    J Biopharm Stat; 2014; 24(6):1264-79. PubMed ID: 25033269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Joint equivalence of means and variances of two populations.
    Grieve AP
    J Biopharm Stat; 1998 Jul; 8(3):377-90. PubMed ID: 9741854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. FALLACIES OF GENERIC EQUIVALENCE THESIS. I. SOME PHYSIOLOGIC FACTORS INFLUENCING GASTROINTESTINAL ABSORPTION.
    DELGADO JN; COSGROVE FP
    Tex State J Med; 1963 Oct; 59():1008-12. PubMed ID: 14067239
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Prescription versus cheapest drug substitution.
    Lepp BA; Defelice SL
    N Y State J Med; 1975 Jan; 75(1):133-5, 146. PubMed ID: 1053813
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.