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: 8023036)

  • 21. Estimation of post-lead-time survival under dependence between lead-time and post-lead-time survival.
    Xu JL; Fagerstrom RM; Prorok PC
    Stat Med; 1999 Jan; 18(2):155-62. PubMed ID: 10028136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Re: All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening.
    Parker C; Dearnaley D
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Jun; 94(11):861-2; author reply 865-6. PubMed ID: 12048276
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Reducing the effects of lead-time bias, length bias and over-detection in evaluating screening mammography: a censored bivariate data approach.
    Mahnken JD; Chan W; Freeman DH; Freeman JL
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Dec; 17(6):643-63. PubMed ID: 18445697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. To screen or not to screen.
    Grosjean O
    JBR-BTR; 2007; 90(1):10-4. PubMed ID: 17405615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Re: All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening.
    Church TR; Ederer F; Mandel JS
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Jun; 94(11):861; author reply 865-6. PubMed ID: 12048277
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The Mayo Lung Cohort: a regression analysis focusing on lung cancer incidence and mortality.
    Strauss GM
    J Clin Oncol; 2002 Apr; 20(8):1973-83. PubMed ID: 11956255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Estimating benefits of screening from observational cohort studies.
    Flanders WD; Longini IM
    Stat Med; 1990 Aug; 9(8):969-80. PubMed ID: 2218198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evidence of survival benefit was often ambiguous in randomized trials of cancer treatments.
    Perneger TV; Brindel P; Combescure C; Gayet-Ageron A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 127():1-8. PubMed ID: 32622900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The case against independent monitoring committees.
    Harrington D; Crowley J; George SL; Pajak T; Redmond C; Wieand S
    Stat Med; 1994 Jul 15-30; 13(13-14):1411-4. PubMed ID: 7973220
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Some practical aspects of the interim monitoring of clinical trials.
    Simon R
    Stat Med; 1994 Jul 15-30; 13(13-14):1401-9. PubMed ID: 7973219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Evaluating the survival of cancer cases detected by screening.
    Walter SD; Stitt LW
    Stat Med; 1987 Dec; 6(8):885-900. PubMed ID: 3438615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A note on sample size determination for comparison of small probabilities.
    Gordon I; Watson R
    Control Clin Trials; 1994 Feb; 15(1):77-9. PubMed ID: 8149773
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Re: All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening.
    Kopans DB; Halpern E
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Jun; 94(11):863; author reply 865-6. PubMed ID: 12048280
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effects of early treatment, lead time and length bias on the mortality experienced by cases detected by screening.
    Morrison AS
    Int J Epidemiol; 1982 Sep; 11(3):261-7. PubMed ID: 7129740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening.
    Black WC; Haggstrom DA; Welch HG
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Feb; 94(3):167-73. PubMed ID: 11830606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Noncompliance in cancer screening trials.
    Gareen IF
    Clin Trials; 2007; 4(4):341-9. PubMed ID: 17848495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Computer-aided system of evaluation for population-based all-in-one service screening (CASE-PASS): from study design to outcome analysis with bias adjustment.
    Chen LS; Yen AM; Duffy SW; Tabar L; Lin WC; Chen HH
    Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Oct; 20(10):786-96. PubMed ID: 20816316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Bias and precision of methods for estimating the difference in restricted mean survival time from an individual patient data meta-analysis.
    Lueza B; Rotolo F; Bonastre J; Pignon JP; Michiels S
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Mar; 16():37. PubMed ID: 27025706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Efficacy of screening for lung cancer. Systematic review].
    Selva A; Puig T; López Alcalde J; Bonfill X
    Med Clin (Barc); 2011 Nov; 137(12):565-71. PubMed ID: 21316716
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Disease-specific survival of men with prostate cancer detected during the screening interval: results of the European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer-Rotterdam after 11 years of follow-up.
    Zhu X; van Leeuwen PJ; Bul M; Otto SJ; de Koning HJ; Bangma CH; Schröder FH; Roobol MJ
    Eur Urol; 2011 Aug; 60(2):330-6. PubMed ID: 21601352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.