Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 105

1.

Big data and large sample size: a cautionary note on the potential for bias.

Kaplan RM, Chambers DA, Glasgow RE.

Clin Transl Sci. 2014 Aug;7(4):342-6. doi: 10.1111/cts.12178. Epub 2014 Jul 15.

2.

Assessing methods to specify the target difference for a randomised controlled trial: DELTA (Difference ELicitation in TriAls) review.

Cook JA, Hislop J, Adewuyi TE, Harrild K, Altman DG, Ramsay CR, Fraser C, Buckley B, Fayers P, Harvey I, Briggs AH, Norrie JD, Fergusson D, Ford I, Vale LD.

Health Technol Assess. 2014 May;18(28):v-vi, 1-175. doi: 10.3310/hta18280. Review.

3.

The effect of sample size and bias on the reliability of estimates of error: a comparative study of Dahlberg's formula.

Springate SD.

Eur J Orthod. 2012 Apr;34(2):158-63. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjr010. Epub 2011 Mar 29.

PMID:
21447784
4.

Adjustment for baseline measurement error in randomized controlled trials induces bias.

Chan SF, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Walter SD.

Control Clin Trials. 2004 Aug;25(4):408-16.

PMID:
15296815
5.

Understanding and minimizing epidemiologic bias in public health research.

Choi BC, Pak AW.

Can J Public Health. 2005 Jul-Aug;96(4):284-6.

PMID:
16625797
6.

Overview of the epidemiology methods and applications: strengths and limitations of observational study designs.

Colditz GA.

Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2010;50 Suppl 1:10-2. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2010.526838.

7.

The number needed to treat (NNT) can be adjusted for bias when the outcome is measured with error.

Marschner IC, Emberson J, Irwig L, Walter SD.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2004 Dec;57(12):1244-52.

PMID:
15617950
8.

Drug safety assessment in clinical trials: methodological challenges and opportunities.

Singh S, Loke YK.

Trials. 2012 Aug 20;13:138. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-138. Review.

9.

Are current standards of reporting quality for clinical trials sufficient in addressing important sources of bias?

Mills EJ, Ayers D, Chou R, Thorlund K.

Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Nov;45(Pt A):2-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.07.019. Epub 2015 Jul 30. Review.

PMID:
26232560
10.

Assessing response reliability of health interview surveys using reinterviews.

Fabricant SJ, Harpham T.

Bull World Health Organ. 1993;71(3-4):341-8.

11.

On stratification, minimization and protection against types 1 and 2 error.

Bracken MB.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jan;54(1):104-5. No abstract available.

PMID:
11246516
12.

Blinded and unblinded internal pilot study designs for clinical trials with count data.

Schneider S, Schmidli H, Friede T.

Biom J. 2013 Jul;55(4):617-33. doi: 10.1002/bimj.201200189. Epub 2013 May 24.

PMID:
23703749
13.

Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials.

Anglemyer A, Horvath HT, Bero L.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 29;(4):MR000034. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2. Review.

PMID:
24782322
14.

Accounting for response misclassification and covariate measurement error improves power and reduces bias in epidemiologic studies.

Cheng D, Branscum AJ, Stamey JD.

Ann Epidemiol. 2010 Jul;20(7):562-7. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.03.012.

PMID:
20538200
15.

Using audit information to adjust parameter estimates for data errors in clinical trials.

Shepherd BE, Shaw PA, Dodd LE.

Clin Trials. 2012 Dec;9(6):721-9. doi: 10.1177/1740774512450100. Epub 2012 Jul 30.

16.

[Future Perspective of Pharmacoepidemiology in the "Big Data Era" and the Growth of Information Sources].

Macías Saint-Gerons D, de la Fuente Honrubia C, de Andrés Trelles F, Catalá-López F.

Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2016 Dec 1;90:e1-e7. Spanish.

17.

Evaluation of bias and logistics in a survey of adults at increased risk for oral health decrements.

Gilbert GH, Duncan RP, Kulley AM, Coward RT, Heft MW.

J Public Health Dent. 1997 Winter;57(1):48-58.

PMID:
9150063
18.

Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomised controlled trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies.

Savović J, Jones H, Altman D, Harris R, Jűni P, Pildal J, Als-Nielsen B, Balk E, Gluud C, Gluud L, Ioannidis J, Schulz K, Beynon R, Welton N, Wood L, Moher D, Deeks J, Sterne J.

Health Technol Assess. 2012 Sep;16(35):1-82. Review.

19.

Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.

Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, Sowden AJ, Sakarovitch C, Song F, Petticrew M, Altman DG; International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group; European Carotid Surgery Trial Collaborative Group.

Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(27):iii-x, 1-173. Review.

20.

Reliability, effect size, and responsiveness of health status measures in the design of randomized and cluster-randomized trials.

Diehr P, Chen L, Patrick D, Feng Z, Yasui Y.

Contemp Clin Trials. 2005 Feb;26(1):45-58. Epub 2005 Jan 27.

PMID:
15837452

Supplemental Content

Support Center