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: 7889226)

  • 21. Simple efficient bias corrected instrumental variable estimator for randomized trials with noncompliance.
    Chan KC
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):786-93. PubMed ID: 22484340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Comparisons of methods for analysis of repeated binary responses with missing data.
    Frank Liu G; Zhan X
    J Biopharm Stat; 2011 May; 21(3):371-92. PubMed ID: 21442514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Statistical methods for the meta-analysis of cluster randomization trials.
    Donner A; Piaggio G; Villar J
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2001 Oct; 10(5):325-38. PubMed ID: 11697225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Handling of baseline measurements in the analysis of crossover trials.
    Chen X; Meng Z; Zhang J
    Stat Med; 2012 Jul; 31(17):1791-803. PubMed ID: 22715129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The performance of a two-stage analysis of ABAB/BABA crossover trials.
    Kabaila P; Vicendese M
    Biom J; 2012 May; 54(3):361-9. PubMed ID: 22685002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Robustness assessments are needed to reduce bias in meta-analyses that include zero-event randomized trials.
    Keus F; Wetterslev J; Gluud C; Gooszen HG; van Laarhoven CJ
    Am J Gastroenterol; 2009 Mar; 104(3):546-51. PubMed ID: 19262513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Missing data in rheumatologic studies and the practical reality of modern approaches to the analysis of incomplete subject data: comment on the article by Baron et al and the editorial by Boers.
    Steele R; Hudson M
    Arthritis Rheum; 2008 Sep; 59(9):1367-8. PubMed ID: 18759312
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A critical review of methods for the assessment of patient-level interactions in individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials, and guidance for practitioners.
    Fisher DJ; Copas AJ; Tierney JF; Parmar MK
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Sep; 64(9):949-67. PubMed ID: 21411280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Marginal modelling of multivariate categorical data.
    Molenberghs G; Lesaffre E
    Stat Med; 1999 Sep 15-30; 18(17-18):2237-55. PubMed ID: 10474136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Model inconsistency, illustrated by the Cox proportional hazards model.
    Ford I; Norrie J; Ahmadi S
    Stat Med; 1995 Apr; 14(8):735-46. PubMed ID: 7644855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Hypothesis testing and estimation in ordinal data under a simple crossover design.
    Lui KJ; Chang KC
    J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1137-47. PubMed ID: 23075013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Estimating treatment efficacy over time: a logistic regression model for binary longitudinal outcomes.
    Choi L; Dominici F; Zeger SL; Ouyang P
    Stat Med; 2005 Sep; 24(18):2789-805. PubMed ID: 16134133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Use of the average baseline versus the time-matched baseline in parallel group thorough QT/QTc studies.
    Meng Z; Quan H; Fan L; Kringle R; Sun G
    J Biopharm Stat; 2010 May; 20(3):665-82. PubMed ID: 20358444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A methodology for analysing a repeated measures and survival outcome simultaneously.
    Rochon J; Gillespie BW
    Stat Med; 2001 Apr; 20(8):1173-84. PubMed ID: 11304734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Clinical trials methodology: randomization, intent-to-treat, and random-effects regression.
    Atkins DC
    Depress Anxiety; 2009; 26(8):697-700. PubMed ID: 19658122
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A comparison of the statistical power of different methods for the analysis of cluster randomization trials with binary outcomes.
    Austin PC
    Stat Med; 2007 Aug; 26(19):3550-65. PubMed ID: 17238238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Confidence interval construction for the difference between two correlated proportions with missing observations.
    Tang NS; Li HQ; Tang ML; Li J
    J Biopharm Stat; 2016; 26(2):323-38. PubMed ID: 25632882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Interpreting data from randomized trials: the Scandinavian prostatectomy study illustrates two common errors.
    Vickers A
    Nat Clin Pract Urol; 2005 Sep; 2(9):404-5. PubMed ID: 16474658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Analysis of a crossover clinical trial by permutation methods.
    Good P; Xie F
    Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Jul; 29(4):565-8. PubMed ID: 18356118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Making sense of clinical trial data: is inverse probability of censoring weighted analysis the answer to crossover bias?
    Rimawi M; Hilsenbeck SG
    J Clin Oncol; 2012 Feb; 30(4):453-8. PubMed ID: 22215751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.