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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

237 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10791503)

  • 1. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses: a review of submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
    Hill SR; Mitchell AS; Henry DA
    JAMA; 2000 Apr; 283(16):2116-21. PubMed ID: 10791503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The evaluation and use of economic evidence to inform cancer drug reimbursement decisions in Canada.
    Yong JH; Beca J; Hoch JS
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Mar; 31(3):229-36. PubMed ID: 23322588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of the Quality of the Clinical Evidence in Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Fit for Purpose?
    Wonder M; Dunlop S
    Value Health; 2015 Jun; 18(4):467-76. PubMed ID: 26091601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses to price and reimbursement decisions in Austria].
    Führlinger S
    Wien Med Wochenschr; 2006 Dec; 156(23-24):612-8. PubMed ID: 17211765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Are cancer drugs less likely to be recommended for listing by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia?
    Chim L; Kelly PJ; Salkeld G; Stockler MR
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(6):463-75. PubMed ID: 20465315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Using pharmacoeconomic analysis to make drug insurance coverage decisions.
    Anis AH; Rahman T; Schechter MT
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1998 Jan; 13(1 Pt 2):119-26. PubMed ID: 10176146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The use of QALY weights for QALY calculations: a review of industry submissions requesting listing on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 2002-4.
    Scuffham PA; Whitty JA; Mitchell A; Viney R
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2008; 26(4):297-310. PubMed ID: 18370565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Cost-effectiveness of new drugs impacts reimbursement decision making but room for improvement].
    Hoomans T; van der Roer N; Severens JL; Delwel GO
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2010; 154():A958. PubMed ID: 20699045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Using economic evaluations to make formulary coverage decisions. So much for guidelines.
    Anis AH; Gagnon Y
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2000 Jul; 18(1):55-62. PubMed ID: 11010604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Methodological quality of economic evaluations of new pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands.
    Hoomans T; Severens JL; van der Roer N; Delwel GO
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2012 Mar; 30(3):219-27. PubMed ID: 22074610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Emerging standardization in pharmacoeconomics.
    Mullins CD; Ogilvie S
    Clin Ther; 1998; 20(6):1194-202; discussion 1192-3. PubMed ID: 9916612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Economic analysis as an aid to subsidisation decisions: the development of Australian guidelines for pharmaceuticals.
    Henry D
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1992 Jan; 1(1):54-67. PubMed ID: 10147039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Rank-order stability analysis (ROSA): testing pharmacoeconomic data.
    Einarson TR; Arikian SR; Doyle JJ
    Med Decis Making; 1995; 15(4):367-72. PubMed ID: 8544680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Ireland: a review of the process.
    Tilson L; O'Leary A; Usher C; Barry M
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(4):307-22. PubMed ID: 20222754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Pharmacoeconomic analyses: making them transparent, making them credible.
    Rennie D; Luft HS
    JAMA; 2000 Apr; 283(16):2158-60. PubMed ID: 10791510
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Repaglinide : a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in type 2 diabetes mellitus.
    Plosker GL; Figgitt DP
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2004; 22(6):389-411. PubMed ID: 15099124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The role of pharmacoeconomic guidelines for formulary approval: the Australian experience.
    Langley PC
    Clin Ther; 1993; 15(6):1154-76; discussion 1120. PubMed ID: 8111812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A guideline for the use of pharmacoeconomic models of diabetes treatment in the US managed-care environment.
    Veenstra DL; Ramsey SD; Sullivan SD
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2002; 20 Suppl 1():21-30. PubMed ID: 12036381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparative review of the pharmacoeconomic guidelines in South Africa.
    Carapinha JL
    J Med Econ; 2017 Jan; 20(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 27564849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of pharmacoeconomic evaluations submitted for reimbursement in Korea.
    Yim EY; Lim SH; Oh MJ; Park HK; Gong JR; Park SE; Yi SY
    Value Health; 2012; 15(1 Suppl):S104-10. PubMed ID: 22265055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.