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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10932429)

  • 21. [The role of HTA in German health care. Do we need impact objectives?].
    Gerhardus A
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2006 Mar; 49(3):233-40. PubMed ID: 16453136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Technology assessment. Old, new, and needs-based.
    Tugwell P; Sitthi-Amorn C; O'Connor A; Hatcher-Roberts J; Bergevin Y; Wolfson M
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1995; 11(4):650-62. PubMed ID: 8567197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach.
    Williams I; Bryan S; McIver S
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2007 Apr; 12(2):73-9. PubMed ID: 17407655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. What is a rapid review? A methodological exploration of rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessments.
    Harker J; Kleijnen J
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2012 Dec; 10(4):397-410. PubMed ID: 23173665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. End-user involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) development: a way to increase impact.
    McGregor M; Brophy JM
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2005; 21(2):263-7. PubMed ID: 15921068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of the impact of a technology appraisal process in England: the South and West Development and Evaluation Committee.
    Dixon S; Coleman P; Nicholl J; Brennan A; Touch S
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2003 Jan; 8(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 12683430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Health services technology: Part 2, Policy and managerial considerations.
    Darr K
    Hosp Top; 1998; 76(4):25-30. PubMed ID: 10538910
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A review and validation of overall survival extrapolation in health technology assessments of cancer immunotherapy by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: how did the initial best estimate compare to trial data subsequently made available?
    Bullement A; Meng Y; Cooper M; Lee D; Harding TL; O'Regan C; Aguiar-Ibanez R
    J Med Econ; 2019 Mar; 22(3):205-214. PubMed ID: 30422080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The Role of Noncomparative Evidence in Health Technology Assessment Decisions.
    Griffiths EA; Macaulay R; Vadlamudi NK; Uddin J; Samuels ER
    Value Health; 2017 Dec; 20(10):1245-1251. PubMed ID: 29241883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Threats to the value of Health Technology Assessment: Qualitative evidence from Canada and Poland.
    Wranik WD; Zielińska DA; Gambold L; Sevgur S
    Health Policy; 2019 Feb; 123(2):191-202. PubMed ID: 30554792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Developing a decision support system to link health technology assessment (HTA) reports to the health system policies in Iran.
    Yazdani S; Jadidfard MP
    Health Policy Plan; 2017 May; 32(4):504-515. PubMed ID: 28025325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Rapid response in health technology assessment: a Delphi study for a Brazilian guideline.
    Silva MT; Silva END; Barreto JOM
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2018 Jun; 18(1):51. PubMed ID: 29884121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Health economics and HTA].
    Kulp W; Greiner W
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2006 Mar; 49(3):257-63. PubMed ID: 16465516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Health technology assessment in Europe. Improving clarity and performance.
    Cookson R; Maynard A
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(2):639-50. PubMed ID: 10932428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.
    Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S
    J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Improving the quality of risk assessments in Canada using a principle-based approach.
    Forristal PM; Wilke DL; McCarty LS
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Apr; 50(3):336-44. PubMed ID: 18321623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evidence informed decision making: the use of "colloquial evidence" at nice.
    Sharma T; Choudhury M; Kaur B; Naidoo B; Garner S; Littlejohns P; Staniszewska S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(3):138-46. PubMed ID: 25991028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Can we reliably benchmark health technology assessment organizations?
    Drummond M; Neumann P; Jönsson B; Luce B; Schwartz JS; Siebert U; Sullivan SD
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2012 Apr; 28(2):159-65. PubMed ID: 22559758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Differences in cancer drug assessment between Spain and the United Kingdom.
    Lozano-Blázquez A; Dickson R; Fraga-Fuentes MD; Martínez-Martínez F; Calleja-Hernández MÁ
    Eur J Cancer; 2015 Sep; 51(13):1843-52. PubMed ID: 26119375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Health technology assessment in Malaysia.
    Sivalal S
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():224-30. PubMed ID: 19527541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.