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 *

60 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7171706)

  • 1. Estimation of relative risk.
    Seigel D; Greenhouse SW
    Biometrics; 1982 Sep; 38(3):857-9. PubMed ID: 7171706
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Neuroepidemiology and biostatistics.
    Ellenberg JH
    Adv Neurol; 1978; 19():169-81. PubMed ID: 742540
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Recontacting subjects in mutagen exposure monitoring studies.
    Busch DB; Bryan GT; Messing EM; Cummings KB
    IRB; 1986; 8(6):1-4. PubMed ID: 11649819
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Adjusting a relative-risk estimate for study imperfections.
    Maldonado G
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2008 Jul; 62(7):655-63. PubMed ID: 18559450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Follow-up: recontacting subjects in mutagen exposure monitoring studies.
    Busch DB; Bryan GT; Easterling D; Leventhal H; Messing EM; Cummings KB
    IRB; 1988; 10(5):9-11. PubMed ID: 11650076
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Is there a relative risk in respect to the measure of the risk of disease?].
    Immich B; Eckmann R
    Lebensversicher Med; 1977 Mar; 29(2):45-50. PubMed ID: 17040
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Introducing a new clinical discipline--clinical epidemiology].
    Ji BH; Ai GY
    Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 1985 Jun; 7(3):234-7. PubMed ID: 2939982
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A note on the estimation of relative risks of rare genetic susceptibility markers.
    Begg CB; Berwick M
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 1997 Feb; 6(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 9037560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Design considerations for estimation of exposure effects on disease risk, using aggregate data studies.
    Sheppard L; Prentice RL; Rossing MA
    Stat Med; 1996 Sep 15-30; 15(17-18):1849-58. PubMed ID: 8888477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Estimating heterogeneity in the probabilities of enumeration for dual-system estimation.
    Alho JM; Mulry MH; Wurdeman K; Kim J
    J Am Stat Assoc; 1993 Sep; 88(423):1,130-6. PubMed ID: 12155418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Statistics for nuclear medicine. Part 2: Estimation from samples and t-tests.
    O'Brien PC; Shampo MA; Robertson JS
    J Nucl Med; 1983 Feb; 24(2):165-71. PubMed ID: 6822880
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Challenging the validity of conclusions based on P-values alone: a critique of contemporary clinical research design and methods.
    Ebramzadeh E; McKellop H; Dorey F; Sarmiento A
    Instr Course Lect; 1994; 43():587-600. PubMed ID: 9097190
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Interpretation of epidemiologic studies].
    Schaffer P; Velten M
    Rev Prat; 2002 May; 52(10):1131-7. PubMed ID: 12107937
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Confounding: regression adjustment.
    Fitzmaurice G
    Nutrition; 2006 May; 22(5):581-3. PubMed ID: 16600821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of methods to approximate standard errors for complex survey data.
    Burt VL; Cohen SB
    Rev Public Data Use; 1984 Oct; 12(3):159-68. PubMed ID: 10270475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Role of the standard deviation in the estimation of benchmark doses with continuous data.
    Gaylor DW; Slikker W
    Risk Anal; 2004 Dec; 24(6):1683-7. PubMed ID: 15660621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Can a statistically significant result be trusted?].
    Everaerd W; Mellenbergh GJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1995 Jul; 139(30):1533-7. PubMed ID: 7675130
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Intercensal change and the indirect estimation of mortality: the case of Pakistan.
    Greene ME
    Pak Dev Rev; 1987; 26(4):569-85. PubMed ID: 12342012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Oral contraceptive use and the risk of cancer].
    Wingo PA
    Fertil Contracept Sex; 1989 Feb; 17(2):125-32. PubMed ID: 12281877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Meta-analysis.
    Elliott AT
    Nucl Med Commun; 1994 Apr; 15(4):218-20. PubMed ID: 8072738
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.