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.
120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10115053)
21. From medical invention to clinical practice: the reimbursement challenge facing new device procedures and technology--part 3: payment. Raab GG; Parr DH J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Nov; 3(11):842-50. PubMed ID: 17412183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Preparing for the introduction of new technologies: who is going to pay for them? Marshall PR J Cardiovasc Manag; 2002; 13(1):14-20. PubMed ID: 11828780 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. American Society of Clinical Oncology guidance statement: the cost of cancer care. Meropol NJ; Schrag D; Smith TJ; Mulvey TM; Langdon RM; Blum D; Ubel PA; Schnipper LE; J Clin Oncol; 2009 Aug; 27(23):3868-74. PubMed ID: 19581533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Evaluating technology under changing financing arrangements. Luce BR Trustee; 1986 Aug; 39(8):15-7. PubMed ID: 10311653 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The price of progress. Getting insurers to cover new procedures is often difficult. Borges W Tex Med; 2001 Jun; 97(6):56-9. PubMed ID: 11430199 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Premier unveils venture. Vendor-sponsored institute to push new technologies. Hensley S Mod Healthc; 1998 Feb; 28(6):14. PubMed ID: 10176650 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Who should be responsible? Brown E Physician Exec; 1996 Jun; 22(6):38-9. PubMed ID: 10158532 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Experimental treatment: can you do the right thing without going broke? Holoweiko M Bus Health; 1995 May; 13(5):38-40, 45-6, 48. PubMed ID: 10164496 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Emerging technologies and medical coverage. Merrikin K; Smith S Clin Ethics Rep; 1996; 10(1):9-12. PubMed ID: 11660222 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Payers and the assessment of clinical utility for companion diagnostics. Quinn B Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2010 Dec; 88(6):751-4. PubMed ID: 21081944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Conditionally funded field evaluations and practical trial design within a health technology assessment framework. Bowen JM; Patterson LL; O'Reilly D; Hopkins RB; Blackhouse G; Burke N; Xie F; Tarride JE; Goeree R J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 May; 6(5):324-31. PubMed ID: 19394573 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluating new medical technology: science or politics? Noe TJ HMO; 1995; 36(4):48-53. PubMed ID: 10166486 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The limited regulatory potential of medical technology assessment. Elhauge E Va Law Rev; 1996 Nov; 82(8):1525-1622. PubMed ID: 16715565 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Estimating the effect of new technology on Medicare Part B expenditure and volume growth: do related procedures matter? Lee DW Adv Health Econ Health Serv Res; 1992; 13():43-64. PubMed ID: 10171714 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reimbursing new technologies: why are the courts judging experimental medicine? Saver RS Stanford Law Rev; 1992 May; 44(5):1095-131. PubMed ID: 10119850 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Technology development from the perspective of industry. Abele JE J Invasive Cardiol; 1993 Mar; 5(2):65-8. PubMed ID: 10171667 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. The trouble with medical innovation. Moskowitz DB Bus Health; 1999 May; 17(5):38-42. PubMed ID: 10387675 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]