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 *

201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11154787)

  • 1. Setting priorities for the adoption of health technologies on a national level -- the Israeli experience.
    Shani S; Siebzehner MI; Luxenburg O; Shemer J
    Health Policy; 2000 Dec; 54(3):169-85. PubMed ID: 11154787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Decisions to adopt new technologies at the hospital level: insights from Israeli medical centers.
    Greenberg D; Peterburg Y; Vekstein D; Pliskin JS
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2005; 21(2):219-27. PubMed ID: 15921062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Economic evaluation of the decisions of the Israeli Public Committee for updating the National List of Health Services in 2006/2007.
    Shmueli A
    Value Health; 2009; 12(2):202-6. PubMed ID: 18657095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Do the equity-efficiency preferences of the Israeli Basket Committee match those of Israeli health policy makers?
    Shmueli A
    Isr J Health Policy Res; 2017; 6():20. PubMed ID: 28469840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Year 2006 update of the Israel National List of Health Services.
    Tamir O; Rabinovich M; Shani M
    Isr Med Assoc J; 2006 Sep; 8(9):595-600. PubMed ID: 17058406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Decision makers' perceptions of health technology decision making and priority setting at the institutional level.
    Gallego G; Fowler S; van Gool K
    Aust Health Rev; 2008 Aug; 32(3):520-7. PubMed ID: 18666881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. A decade to the Israeli Center for Technology Assessment in Health Care.
    Tamir O; Shemer J; Shani M; Vaknin S; Siebzehner MI
    Isr Med Assoc J; 2008 Dec; 10(12):901-5. PubMed ID: 19160954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study.
    Singer PA; Martin DK; Giacomini M; Purdy L
    BMJ; 2000 Nov; 321(7272):1316-8. PubMed ID: 11090513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Decision making in acquiring medical technologies in Israeli medical centers: a preliminary study.
    Greenberg D; Pliskin JS; Peterburg Y
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2003; 19(1):194-201. PubMed ID: 12701951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Health technology assessment: research trends and future priorities in Europe.
    Nielsen CP; Funch TM; Kristensen FB
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2011 Jul; 16 Suppl 2():6-15. PubMed ID: 21737525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. National Authority for Health: France.
    Rochaix L; Xerri B
    Issue Brief (Commonw Fund); 2009 Jul; 58():1-9. PubMed ID: 19639712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Health care technology adoption and diffusion in a social context.
    Coyte PC; Holmes D
    Policy Polit Nurs Pract; 2007 Feb; 8(1):47-54. PubMed ID: 17470771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Adoption of new health care services in Norway (1993-1997): specialists' self-assessment according to national criteria for priority setting.
    Norheim OF; Ekeberg O; Evensen SA; Halvorsen M; Kvernebo K
    Health Policy; 2001 Apr; 56(1):65-79. PubMed ID: 11230909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Development of medical care technology. The case of Israel.
    Ellencweig AY
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1988; 4(2):255-67. PubMed ID: 10287623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A PROCESS OF PRIORITIZING TOPICS FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN KAZAKHSTAN.
    Kosherbayeva L; Hailey D; Kurakbaev K; Tabarov A; Kumar A; Gutzskaya G; Stepkina E
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2016 Jan; 32(3):147-51. PubMed ID: 27502426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interests in health care technology assessment (HCTA) and HCTA training needs in eight European countries: COMETT-ASSESS.
    Szczepura A; Kankaanpää J
    Soc Sci Med; 1994 Jun; 38(12):1679-88. PubMed ID: 8047927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Priority setting for health technology assessment in The Netherlands: principles and practice.
    Oortwijn WJ; Vondeling H; van Barneveld T; van Vugt C; Bouter LM
    Health Policy; 2002 Dec; 62(3):227-42. PubMed ID: 12385849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How to choose health technologies to be assessed by HTA? A review of criteria for priority setting.
    Specchia ML; Favale M; Di Nardo F; Rotundo G; Favaretti C; Ricciardi W; de Waure C;
    Epidemiol Prev; 2015; 39(4 Suppl 1):39-44. PubMed ID: 26499414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Strategies for successful evaluation and policy-making toward health care technology on the move: the case of medical lasers.
    Banta HD; Vondeling H
    Soc Sci Med; 1994 Jun; 38(12):1663-74. PubMed ID: 8047925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.