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.
69 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15361182)
21. Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Sullivan SD; Mauskopf JA; Augustovski F; Jaime Caro J; Lee KM; Minchin M; Orlewska E; Penna P; Rodriguez Barrios JM; Shau WY Value Health; 2014; 17(1):5-14. PubMed ID: 24438712 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Using cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit analysis to allocate health resources: a level playing field for prevention? Phillips KA; Hotlgrave DR Am J Prev Med; 1997; 13(1):18-25. PubMed ID: 9037338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Pharmacoeconomics. Ahuja J; Gupta M; Gupta AK; Kohli K Natl Med J India; 2004; 17(2):80-3. PubMed ID: 15141600 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The complex interface between economy and healthcare: An introductory overview for clinicians. Ottolini FL; Buggio L; Somigliana E; Vercellini P Eur J Intern Med; 2016 Dec; 36():1-6. PubMed ID: 27577606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Integrating economic analysis into cancer clinical trials: the National Cancer Institute-American Society of Clinical Oncology Economics Workbook. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1998; (24):1-28. PubMed ID: 9704318 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. The "value" of value in gynecologic oncology practice in the United States: Society of Gynecologic Oncology evidence-based review and recommendations. Cohn DE; Ko E; Meyer LA; Wright JD; Temkin SM; Foote J; Jones NL; Havrilesky LJ Gynecol Oncol; 2017 Apr; 145(1):185-191. PubMed ID: 28258763 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategy for postmenopausal Japanese women. Yoshimura M; Moriwaki K; Noto S; Takiguchi T Osteoporos Int; 2017 Feb; 28(2):643-652. PubMed ID: 27743068 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The relevance of unrelated costs internal and external to the healthcare sector to the outcome of a cost-comparison analysis of secondary prevention: the case of general colorectal cancer screening in the German population. Tscheulin DK; Drevs F Eur J Health Econ; 2010 Apr; 11(2):141-50. PubMed ID: 19449159 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The value of gynecologic cancer follow-up: evidence-based ignorance? Lajer H; Jensen MB; Kilsmark J; Albæk J; Svane D; Mirza MR; Geertsen PF; Reerman D; Hansen K; Milter MC; Mogensen O Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2010 Nov; 20(8):1307-20. PubMed ID: 21051970 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Health economics studies in dermatology]. Rogalski C; Simon J; Paasch U Hautarzt; 2006 Apr; 57(4):297-302. PubMed ID: 15971088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Addressing the Value of Gene Therapy and Enhancing Patient Access to Transformative Treatments. Salzman R; Cook F; Hunt T; Malech HL; Reilly P; Foss-Campbell B; Barrett D Mol Ther; 2018 Dec; 26(12):2717-2726. PubMed ID: 30414722 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. We need a new paradigm in gynecologic cancer care: SGO proposes solutions for delivery, quality and reimbursement policies. Alvarez RD; Gray HJ; Timmins PF; Gibb RK; Edelson M; Fowler JM; Havrilesky LJ; McCauley DL; Nash JD; Rahaman J; Rash JK; Rodabaugh KJ; Powell MA; Bristow RE; Brown JV; Tewari D; Cliby WA; Anastasia P; Robinson WR; Shahin MS; Cantrell LA; Cloven NG; Gold MA; Hope JM; Muntz HG; Sorosky JI; Elkas JC; Frumovitz MM; Jewell E; Spillman MA; Naumann RW Gynecol Oncol; 2013 Apr; 129(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 23638463 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. 2016 reflections on the favorable cost-benefit of lung cancer screening. Pyenson B; Dieguez G Ann Transl Med; 2016 Apr; 4(8):155. PubMed ID: 27195273 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Principles of economic evaluation in cancer screening. Krahn M; Naglie G Cancer Treat Res; 1996; 86():25-40. PubMed ID: 8886436 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. If no difference in effectiveness is found between two treatments it may be because the treatments are similarly ineffective. Treasure T; Macbeth F; Russell C Ann Transl Med; 2015 Aug; 3(14):201. PubMed ID: 26417585 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]