BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Alonso A, Molenberghs G. Surrogate end points: hopes and perils. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 2014;8:255-9. [DOI: 10.1586/14737167.8.3.255] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Tufanaru C. Surrogate outcomes. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep 2016;14:1-2. [PMID: 27941504 DOI: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-003172] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Meyvisch P, Alonso A, Van der Elst W, Molenberghs G. Assessing the predictive value of a binary surrogate for a binary true endpoint based on the minimum probability of a prediction error. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2019;18:304-15. [DOI: 10.1002/pst.1924] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Blix E, Brurberg KG, Reierth E, Reinar LM, Øian P. STAN technology, surrogate outcomes and possible sources of bias. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016;95:608-9. [DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12875] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Meyvisch P, Kambili C, Andries K, Lounis N, Theeuwes M, Dannemann B, Vandebosch A, Van der Elst W, Molenberghs G, Alonso A. Evaluation of six months sputum culture conversion as a surrogate endpoint in a multidrug resistant-tuberculosis trial. PLoS One 2018;13:e0200539. [PMID: 30024924 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200539] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Wu Z, He P, Geng Z. Sufficient conditions for concluding surrogacy based on observed data. Statist Med 2011;30:2422-34. [DOI: 10.1002/sim.4273] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Mattes WB, Goodsaid F. Regulatory landscapes for biomarkers and diagnostic tests: Qualification, approval, and role in clinical practice. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2018;243:256-61. [PMID: 29110507 DOI: 10.1177/1535370217739629] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Blix E, Brurberg KG, Reierth E, Reinar LM, Øian P. Statistical significance is not necessarily equal to clinical significance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016;95:1192-1192. [DOI: 10.1111/aogs.12938] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Alonso A, Milanzi E, Molenberghs G, Buyck C, Bijnens L. Impact of selection bias on the evaluation of clusters of chemical compounds in the drug discovery process. Pharmaceut Statist 2015;14:129-38. [DOI: 10.1002/pst.1665] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Alonso A, Milanzi E, Molenberghs G, Buyck C, Bijnens L. A new modeling approach for quantifying expert opinion in the drug discovery process. Stat Med 2015;34:1590-604. [PMID: 25705858 DOI: 10.1002/sim.6459] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]