Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 100

1.

The importance of assessing the fit of logistic regression models: a case study.

Hosmer DW, Taber S, Lemeshow S.

Am J Public Health. 1991 Dec;81(12):1630-5.

2.

Are studies reporting significant results more likely to be published?

Koletsi D, Karagianni A, Pandis N, Makou M, Polychronopoulou A, Eliades T.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Nov;136(5):632.e1-5; discussion 632-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.02.024.

PMID:
19892276
3.

[Meta-analysis of the Italian studies on short-term effects of air pollution].

Biggeri A, Bellini P, Terracini B; Italian MISA Group..

Epidemiol Prev. 2001 Mar-Apr;25(2 Suppl):1-71. Italian.

PMID:
11515188
5.

A review of two journals found that articles using multivariable logistic regression frequently did not report commonly recommended assumptions.

Ottenbacher KJ, Ottenbacher HR, Tooth L, Ostir GV.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Nov;57(11):1147-52. Review.

PMID:
15567630
6.

Quantitative evaluation of multiplicity in epidemiology and public health research.

Ottenbacher KJ.

Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Apr 1;147(7):615-9.

PMID:
9554599
7.

A SAS macro for residual deviance of ordinal regression analysis.

Wan JY, Wang W, Bromberg J.

Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1994 Dec;45(4):307-10.

PMID:
7736732
8.

Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment.

Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Golder S, Riemsma R, Woolacoot N, Glanville J.

Health Technol Assess. 2004 Sep;8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. Review.

9.

Tree-based model checking for logistic regression.

Su X.

Stat Med. 2007 May 10;26(10):2154-69.

PMID:
16969891
10.
11.

Multivariable models in biobehavioral research.

Freedland KE, Reese RL, Steinmeyer BC.

Psychosom Med. 2009 Feb;71(2):205-16. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181906e57. Review.

PMID:
19218467
13.

Evaluation of graphical diagnostics for assessing goodness of fit of logistic regression models.

Pavan Kumar VV, Duffull SB.

J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2011 Apr;38(2):205-22. doi: 10.1007/s10928-010-9189-6. Epub 2010 Dec 14.

PMID:
21153868
14.

Principles for modeling propensity scores in medical research: a systematic literature review.

Weitzen S, Lapane KL, Toledano AY, Hume AL, Mor V.

Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2004 Dec;13(12):841-53. Review.

PMID:
15386709
15.

A review of statistical methods in the Journal of Advanced Nursing.

Anthony D.

J Adv Nurs. 1996 Nov;24(5):1089-94. Review.

PMID:
8933272
16.

Time trends in the impact factor of Public Health journals.

López-Abente G, Muñoz-Tinoco C.

BMC Public Health. 2005 Mar 18;5:24.

17.

Logistic regression: a brief primer.

Stoltzfus JC.

Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Oct;18(10):1099-104. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01185.x.

18.

Logistic regression models in obstetrics and gynecology literature.

Khan KS, Chien PF, Dwarakanath LS.

Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Jun;93(6):1014-20. Review.

PMID:
10362173
19.

Evaluation of logistic regression reporting in current obstetrics and gynecology literature.

Mikolajczyk RT, DiSilvestro A, Zhang J.

Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Feb;111(2 Pt 1):413-9. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318160f38e. Erratum in: Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Apr;111(4):996. DiSilvesto, Alexis [corrected to DiSilvestro, Alexis].

PMID:
18238980
20.

[Evaluation of epidemiological articles published in 2 journals in the area of public health].

Villa-Romero AR, Franco-Marina F, García-Sancho MC, López-Cervantes M.

Salud Publica Mex. 1989 May-Jun;31(3):394-401. Spanish.

PMID:
2772739

Supplemental Content

Support Center