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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8019581)

  • 1. Sequential method of estimating the LD50 using a modified up-and-down rule.
    Jung H; Choi SC
    J Biopharm Stat; 1994 Mar; 4(1):19-30. PubMed ID: 8019581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Interval estimation of the LD50 based on an up-and-down experiment.
    Choi SC
    Biometrics; 1990 Jun; 46(2):485-92. PubMed ID: 2364133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Nonparametric step-down test procedures for finding minimum effective dose.
    Sidik K; Morris RW
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 May; 9(2):217-40. PubMed ID: 10379690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Small-sample adjustments in using the sandwich variance estimator in generalized estimating equations.
    Pan W; Wall MM
    Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(10):1429-41. PubMed ID: 12185894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Some new multiple-test procedures for dose finding.
    Dunnett CW; Tamhane AC
    J Biopharm Stat; 1998 Jul; 8(3):353-66. PubMed ID: 9741852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The distribution of the maximum likelihood estimator in up-and-down experiments for quantal dose-response data.
    Vågerö M; Sundberg R
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Aug; 9(3):499-519. PubMed ID: 10473034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals for the correlation corrected for range restriction: a simulation study.
    Chan W; Chan DW
    Psychol Methods; 2004 Sep; 9(3):369-85. PubMed ID: 15355154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Use of lattice square designs in bioassays.
    Wang W; Kshirsagar AM
    J Biopharm Stat; 1996 May; 6(2):185-99. PubMed ID: 8732913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A method for estimating and testing area under the curve in serial sacrifice, batch, and complete data designs.
    Holder DJ; Hsuan F; Dixit R; Soper K
    J Biopharm Stat; 1999 Aug; 9(3):451-64. PubMed ID: 10473031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reduction of animal use for toxicological evaluation: the Netherlands Health Council report on the LD50.
    van Noordwijk J; Seegers AJ
    Dev Biol Stand; 1986; 64():277-85. PubMed ID: 3792652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Detecting a lack of association: an equivalence testing approach.
    Goertzen JR; Cribbie RA
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 Nov; 63(Pt 3):527-37. PubMed ID: 20030968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An up-and-down procedure for acute toxicity testing.
    Bruce RD
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1985 Feb; 5(1):151-7. PubMed ID: 3987991
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Is the prediction of LD50 using cell cultures generally valid?].
    Halle W; Göres E; Baeger I
    Pharmazie; 1987 Dec; 42(12):848-50. PubMed ID: 3444850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An alternative approach to the optimal design of an LD50 bioassay.
    Markus RA; Frank J; Groshen S; Azen SP
    Stat Med; 1995 Apr; 14(8):841-52. PubMed ID: 7644863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A multiple comparison procedure to control the strong stagewise family error rate in comparing test treatments and a control.
    Chen M; Kianifard F
    J Biopharm Stat; 1997 Jul; 7(3):355-67. PubMed ID: 9252830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of several methods for analyzing censored data.
    Hewett P; Ganser GH
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2007 Oct; 51(7):611-32. PubMed ID: 17940277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sample sizes for experiments with multivariate repeated measures.
    Guo X; Johnson WD
    J Biopharm Stat; 1996 May; 6(2):155-76. PubMed ID: 8732911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An interactive computer program that accurately estimates the ED50, its standard error and other parameters related to the probit regression line.
    Hanes B; Gocka EF; Hanes SD
    J Environ Pathol Toxicol; 1980 Sep; 4(2-3):459-64. PubMed ID: 7462913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of the in vitro cytotoxicities and acute in vivo toxicities of 59 chemicals.
    Clothier RH; Hulme LM; Smith M; Balls M
    Mol Toxicol; 1987-1988 Fall; 1(4):571-7. PubMed ID: 3509703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of the up-and-down method and the fixed-dose procedure for acute oral toxicity testing.
    Yam J; Reer PJ; Bruce RD
    Food Chem Toxicol; 1991 Apr; 29(4):259-63. PubMed ID: 2040488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.