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 *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10888953)

  • 1. Appropriateness of surgery for sciatica: reliability of guidelines from expert panels.
    Vader JP; Porchet F; Larequi-Lauber T; Dubois RW; Burnand B
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2000 Jul; 25(14):1831-6. PubMed ID: 10888953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Statistical approaches in the development of clinical practice guidelines from expert panels: the case of laminectomy in sciatica patients.
    Wietlisbach V; Vader JP; Porchet F; Costanza MC; Burnand B
    Med Care; 1999 Aug; 37(8):785-97. PubMed ID: 10448721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reliability of panel-based guidelines for colonoscopy: an international comparison.
    Burnand B; Vader JP; Froehlich F; Dupriez K; Larequi-Lauber T; Pache I; Dubois RW; Brook RH; Gonvers JJ
    Gastrointest Endosc; 1998 Feb; 47(2):162-6. PubMed ID: 9512282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Appropriateness of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: comparison of American and Swiss criteria.
    Vader JP; Burnand B; Froehlich F; Dupriez K; Larequi-Lauber T; Pache I; Dubois RW; Gonvers JJ; Brook RH
    Int J Qual Health Care; 1997 Apr; 9(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 9154494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The assessment of appropriate indications for laminectomy.
    Porchet F; Vader JP; Larequi-Lauber T; Costanza MC; Burnand B; Dubois RW
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 1999 Mar; 81(2):234-9. PubMed ID: 10204927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Development of appropriateness criteria for colonoscopy: comparison between a standardized expert panel and an evidence-based medicine approach.
    Nicollier-Fahrni A; Vader JP; Froehlich F; Gonvers JJ; Burnand B
    Int J Qual Health Care; 2003 Feb; 15(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 12630797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of appropriateness ratings for cataract surgery between convened and mail-only multidisciplinary panels.
    Tobacman JK; Scott IU; Cyphert ST; Zimmerman MB
    Med Decis Making; 2001; 21(6):490-7. PubMed ID: 11760106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Appropriateness criteria for surgery improve clinical outcomes in patients with low back pain and/or sciatica.
    Danon-Hersch N; Samartzis D; Wietlisbach V; Porchet F; Vader JP
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Mar; 35(6):672-83. PubMed ID: 20139809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reliability of clinical guideline development using mail-only versus in-person expert panels.
    Washington DL; Bernstein SJ; Kahan JP; Leape LL; Kamberg CJ; Shekelle PG
    Med Care; 2003 Dec; 41(12):1374-81. PubMed ID: 14668670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reproducibility of measures of overuse of cataract surgery by three physician panels.
    Tobacman JK; Scott IU; Cyphert S; Zimmerman B
    Med Care; 1999 Sep; 37(9):937-45. PubMed ID: 10493471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of panel composition on physician ratings of appropriateness of abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: elucidating differences between multispecialty panel results and specialty society recommendations.
    Herrin J; Etchason JA; Kahan JP; Brook RH; Ballard DJ
    Health Policy; 1997 Oct; 42(1):67-81. PubMed ID: 10173494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Expert panel vs decision-analysis recommendations for postdischarge coronary angiography after myocardial infarction.
    Kuntz KM; Tsevat J; Weinstein MC; Goldman L
    JAMA; 1999 Dec; 282(23):2246-51. PubMed ID: 10605977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Appropriateness of indications for surgery of lumbar disc hernia and spinal stenosis.
    Larequi-Lauber T; Vader JP; Burnand B; Brook RH; Kosecoff J; Sloutskis D; Fankhauser H; Berney J; de Tribolet N; Paccaud F
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1997 Jan; 22(2):203-9. PubMed ID: 9122803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Setting standards for effectiveness: a comparison of expert panels and decision analysis.
    Bernstein SJ; Hofer TP; Meijler AP; Rigter H
    Int J Qual Health Care; 1997 Aug; 9(4):255-63. PubMed ID: 9304424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures.
    Shekelle PG; Kahan JP; Bernstein SJ; Leape LL; Kamberg CJ; Park RE
    N Engl J Med; 1998 Jun; 338(26):1888-95. PubMed ID: 9637810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Appropriate treatment for Crohn's disease: methodology and summary results of a multidisciplinary international expert panel approach--EPACT.
    Vader JP; Froehlich F; Juillerat P; Burnand B; Felley C; Gonvers JJ; Mottet C; Pittet V; Dubois RW; Wietlisbach V; Michetti P
    Digestion; 2006; 73(4):237-48. PubMed ID: 16940727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Analysis of the Appropriateness of Off-Label Antipsychotic Use for Mental Health Indications in a Veteran Population.
    Painter JT; Owen R; Henderson KL; Bauer MS; Mittal D; Hudson TJ
    Pharmacotherapy; 2017 Apr; 37(4):438-446. PubMed ID: 28164355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The appropriateness of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in academic medical centers. Working Group of the Appropriateness Project of the Academic Medical Center Consortium.
    Leape LL; Hilborne LH; Schwartz JS; Bates DW; Rubin HR; Slavin P; Park RE; Witter DM; Panzer RJ; Brook RH
    Ann Intern Med; 1996 Jul; 125(1):8-18. PubMed ID: 8644996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Appropriateness criteria for coronary angiography in angina: reliability and validity.
    Hemingway H; Chen R; Junghans C; Timmis A; Eldridge S; Black N; Shekelle P; Feder G
    Ann Intern Med; 2008 Aug; 149(4):221-31. PubMed ID: 18711152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Coronary angiography and revascularization: defining procedural indications through formal group processes. The Canadian Revascularization Panel, the Canadian Coronary Angiography Panel.
    Naylor CD; McGlynn EA; Leape LL; Pinfold SP; Bernstein SJ; Hilborne LH; Park RE; Kahan JP; Brook RH
    Can J Cardiol; 1994; 10(1):41-8. PubMed ID: 8111670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.