Similar Search Results

Discussion on "Statistical Issues Arising in the Women's Health Initiative"

Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 61 (2005) 4, pp. 920-921

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010946598

Estimation of Population Attributable Fractions from Fitted Incidence Ratios and Exposure Survey Data, with an Application to Electromagnetic Fields and Childhood Leukemia

Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 57 (2001) 1, pp. 182-188

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010946712

Putting Background Information About Relative Risks into Conjugate Prior Distributions

Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 57 (2001) 3, pp. 663-670

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010946764

Generalized Conjugate Priors for Bayesian Analysis of Risk and Survival Regressions

Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 59 (2003) 1, pp. 92-99

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010947365

Letter to the Editor of Biometrics

Greenland, Sander; Lin, D. Y.; Kronmal, R. A.; Psaty, B. M. - In: Biometrics 55 (1999) 3, pp. 990-991

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010947384

When Should Epidemiologic Regressions Use Random Coefficients?

Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 56 (2000) 3, pp. 915-921

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010947850

The Intensity-Score Approach to Adjusting for Confounding

Brumback, Babette; Greenland, Sander; Redman, Mary; … - In: Biometrics 59 (2003) 2, pp. 274-285

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010947856

The Performance of Random Coefficient Regression in Accounting for Residual Confounding

Gustafson, Paul; Greenland, Sander - In: Biometrics 62 (2006) 3, pp. 760-768

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010948343

Simpsonâ€™s Paradox From Adding Constants in Contingency Tables as an Example of Bayesian Noncollapsibility

Greenland, Sander - In: The American Statistician 64 (2010) 4, pp. 340-344

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009358070

Multiple-bias modelling for analysis of observational data

Greenland, Sander - In: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 168 (2005) 2, pp. 267-306

Conventional analytic results do not reflect any source of uncertainty other than random error, and as a result readers must rely on informal judgments regarding the effect of possible biases. When standard errors are small these judgments often fail to capture sources of uncertainty and their...

Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005682561