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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8262020)

  • 1. Recommendations for the design and analysis of nutritional epidemiologic studies with measurement errors in the exposure variables. From the BGA Commission on Nutritional Epidemiology.
    Eur J Clin Nutr; 1993 Oct; 47 Suppl 2():S53-7. PubMed ID: 8262020
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Epidemiologic studies: pitfalls in interpretation.
    Westhoff CL
    Dialogues Contracept; 1995; 4(5):5-6, 8. PubMed ID: 12288680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Some methodological issues in nutritional epidemiology.
    Day NE; Ferrari P
    IARC Sci Publ; 2002; 156():5-10. PubMed ID: 12484110
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Statistical methods for epidemiologic studies of the health effects of air pollution.
    Navidi W; Thomas D; Langholz B; Stram D
    Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 1999 May; (86):1-50; discussion 51-6. PubMed ID: 10465799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Minimizing error in the field: quality control in dietary surveys.
    Haraldsdóttir J
    Eur J Clin Nutr; 1993 Oct; 47 Suppl 2():S19-24. PubMed ID: 8262013
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical research of lasers in gynecology. Aspects of study design and statistical analysis.
    Wheeler JM
    Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am; 1991 Sep; 18(3):667-76. PubMed ID: 1956670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Within- and between-cohort variation in measured macronutrient intakes, taking account of measurement errors, in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study.
    Ferrari P; Kaaks R; Fahey MT; Slimani N; Day NE; Pera G; Boshuizen HC; Roddam A; Boeing H; Nagel G; Thiebaut A; Orfanos P; Krogh V; Braaten T; Riboli E;
    Am J Epidemiol; 2004 Oct; 160(8):814-22. PubMed ID: 15466504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Interpretation of epidemiologic studies. Type of study, elements of bias, causality].
    Touzet S; Colin C
    Rev Prat; 1999 Oct; 49(16):1797-804. PubMed ID: 10578612
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. What kind of controls to use in case control studies of malformed infants: recall bias versus "teratogen nonspecificity" bias.
    Hook EB
    Teratology; 2000 May; 61(5):325-6. PubMed ID: 10777825
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The effects of recall errors and of selection bias in epidemiologic studies of mobile phone use and cancer risk.
    Vrijheid M; Deltour I; Krewski D; Sanchez M; Cardis E
    J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol; 2006 Jul; 16(4):371-84. PubMed ID: 16773122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Differential recall bias and spurious associations in case/control studies.
    Barry D
    Stat Med; 1996 Dec; 15(23):2603-16. PubMed ID: 8961466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Recall bias in melanoma risk factors and measurement error effects: a nested case-control study within the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study.
    Parr CL; Hjartåker A; Laake P; Lund E; Veierød MB
    Am J Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 169(3):257-66. PubMed ID: 19011116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Response to "What kid of controls to use in case control studies of malformed infants: recall bias versus 'teratogen nonspecificity' bias".
    Prieto L; Martínez-Frias ML
    Teratology; 2000 Dec; 62(6):372-3. PubMed ID: 11155894
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How to make sense of clinical research.
    Wooten JM; Ross VM
    RN; 2005 Jan; 68(1):22-7; quiz 28. PubMed ID: 15742745
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Occupational epidemiologic study design and application.
    Blair A; Hayes RB; Stewart PA; Zahm SH
    Occup Med; 1996; 11(3):403-19. PubMed ID: 8887376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Overcoming ecologic bias using the two-phase study design.
    Wakefield J; Haneuse SJ
    Am J Epidemiol; 2008 Apr; 167(8):908-16. PubMed ID: 18270370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interpretation of low to moderate relative risks in environmental epidemiologic studies.
    Acquavella JF; Friedlander BR; Ireland BK
    Annu Rev Public Health; 1994; 15():179-201. PubMed ID: 8054080
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Repeated 24-h recalls with young schoolchildren. A feasible alternative to dietary history from parents?
    Haraldsdóttir J; Hermansen B
    Eur J Clin Nutr; 1995 Oct; 49(10):729-39. PubMed ID: 8536651
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Feeding Infants and Toddlers Study (FITS): development of the FITS survey in comparison to other dietary survey methods.
    Ziegler P; Briefel R; Clusen N; Devaney B
    J Am Diet Assoc; 2006 Jan; 106(1 Suppl 1):S12-27. PubMed ID: 16376627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.