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 *

198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11154787)

  • 21. Priority setting for health technology adoption at the national level: Lessons learned over 25 years' experience.
    Luxenburg O; Morginstin T; Myers V; Saban M; Shemer J; Wilf-Miron R
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2023 Nov; 39(1):e71. PubMed ID: 37929308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Moving low value care lists into action: prioritizing candidate health technologies for reassessment using administrative data.
    Soril LJJ; Seixas BV; Mitton C; Bryan S; Clement FM
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2018 Aug; 18(1):640. PubMed ID: 30111308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Establishing a comprehensive continuum from an evidentiary base to policy development for health technologies: the Ontario experience.
    Levin L; Goeree R; Sikich N; Jorgensen B; Brouwers MC; Easty T; Zahn C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(3):299-309. PubMed ID: 17579931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. A model for priority setting of health technology assessment: the experience of AHP-TOPSIS combination approach.
    Mobinizadeh M; Raeissi P; Nasiripour AA; Olyaeemanesh A; Tabibi SJ
    Daru; 2016 Apr; 24():10. PubMed ID: 27068692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Opportunity costs and local health service spending decisions: a qualitative study from Wales.
    Karlsberg Schaffer S; Sussex J; Hughes D; Devlin N
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2016 Mar; 16():103. PubMed ID: 27012523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Health care technology in Australia.
    Hailey D
    Health Policy; 1994; 30(1-3):23-72. PubMed ID: 10139492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The process of updating the National List of Health Services in Israel: is it legitimate? Is it fair?
    Greenberg D; Siebzehner MI; Pliskin JS
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25(3):255-61. PubMed ID: 19619343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Identification and priority setting for health technology assessment in The Netherlands: actors and activities.
    Oortwijn W; Banta D; Vondeling H; Bouter L
    Health Policy; 1999 Jun; 47(3):241-53. PubMed ID: 10538921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Quality of health care, accreditation, and health technology assessment in Croatia: role of agency for quality and accreditation in health].
    Mittermayer R; Huić M; Mestrović J
    Acta Med Croatica; 2010 Dec; 64(5):425-34. PubMed ID: 21692267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Health technology assessment in Switzerland.
    Cranovsky R; Schilling J; Faisst K; Koch P; Gutzwiller F; Brunner HH
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(2):576-90. PubMed ID: 10932425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Development and implementation of health technology assessment in Argentina: two steps forward and one step back.
    Rubinstein A; Pichon-Riviere A; Augustovski F
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():260-9. PubMed ID: 19527545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Policy formulation and technology assessment.
    Banta HD; Behney CJ
    Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc; 1981; 59(3):445-79. PubMed ID: 6792555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Priority setting for health technology assessments: a systematic review of current practical approaches.
    Noorani HZ; Husereau DR; Boudreau R; Skidmore B
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(3):310-5. PubMed ID: 17579932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Insurance coverage for experimental technologies.
    Steinberg EP; Tunis S; Shapiro D
    Health Aff (Millwood); 1995; 14(4):143-58. PubMed ID: 8690340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The impact of the UK NHS purchaser-provider split on the 'rational' introduction of new medical technologies.
    Rosen R; Mays N
    Health Policy; 1998 Feb; 43(2):103-23. PubMed ID: 10177613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. QUALITY OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORTS PREPARED FOR THE MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
    Hua M; Boonstra T; Kelly PJ; Wilson A; Craig JC; Webster AC
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2016 Jan; 32(4):315-323. PubMed ID: 27691988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. How health economic evaluation (HEE) contributes to decision-making in public health care: the case of Brazil.
    Elias FT; Araújo DV
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2014; 108(7):405-12. PubMed ID: 25444299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.