92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16626416)
1. Incorporating direct and indirect evidence using bayesian methods: an applied case study in ovarian cancer.
Griffin S; Bojke L; Main C; Palmer S
Value Health; 2006; 9(2):123-31. PubMed ID: 16626416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Trastuzumab for the treatment of primary breast cancer in HER2-positive women: a single technology appraisal.
Ward S; Pilgrim H; Hind D
Health Technol Assess; 2009 Jun; 13 Suppl 1():1-6. PubMed ID: 19567207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Trastuzumab for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastro-oesophageal junction.
Norman G; Rice S; Spackman E; Stirk L; Danso-Appiah A; Suh D; Palmer S; Eastwood A
Health Technol Assess; 2011 May; 15 Suppl 1():33-42. PubMed ID: 21609651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons: an introduction to mixed treatment comparisons.
Jansen JP; Crawford B; Bergman G; Stam W
Value Health; 2008; 11(5):956-64. PubMed ID: 18489499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Incorporating model uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis: a Bayesian model averaging approach.
Negrín MA; Vázquez-Polo FJ
J Health Econ; 2008 Sep; 27(5):1250-9. PubMed ID: 18490067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Docetaxel for the adjuvant treatment of early node-positive breast cancer: a single technology appraisal.
Chilcott J; Lloyd Jones M; Wilkinson A
Health Technol Assess; 2009 Jun; 13 Suppl 1():7-13. PubMed ID: 19567208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-utility analysis of platinum-based chemotherapy versus taxane and other regimens for ovarian cancer.
Lairson DR; Parikh RC; Cormier JN; Du XL
Value Health; 2014; 17(1):34-42. PubMed ID: 24438715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Survival benefits with diverse chemotherapy regimens for ovarian cancer: meta-analysis of multiple treatments.
Kyrgiou M; Salanti G; Pavlidis N; Paraskevaidis E; Ioannidis JP
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Nov; 98(22):1655-63. PubMed ID: 17105988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Using the 21-gene assay to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decision-making in early-stage breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness evaluation in the German setting.
Blohmer JU; Rezai M; Kümmel S; Kühn T; Warm M; Friedrichs K; Benkow A; Valentine WJ; Eiermann W
J Med Econ; 2013; 16(1):30-40. PubMed ID: 22966753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Decision analytical economic modelling within a Bayesian framework: application to prophylactic antibiotics use for caesarean section.
Cooper NJ; Sutton AJ; Abrams KR
Stat Methods Med Res; 2002 Dec; 11(6):491-512. PubMed ID: 12516986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An alternative parameterization of Bayesian logistic hierarchical models for mixed treatment comparisons.
Pechlivanoglou P; Abegaz F; Postma MJ; Wit E
Pharm Stat; 2015; 14(4):322-31. PubMed ID: 25958984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How valuable are multiple treatment comparison methods in evidence-based health-care evaluation?
Cooper NJ; Peters J; Lai MC; Juni P; Wandel S; Palmer S; Paulden M; Conti S; Welton NJ; Abrams KR; Bujkiewicz S; Spiegelhalter D; Sutton AJ
Value Health; 2011; 14(2):371-80. PubMed ID: 21296599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bayesian Multiparameter Evidence Synthesis to Inform Decision Making: A Case Study in Metastatic Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer.
Tan SH; Abrams KR; Bujkiewicz S
Med Decis Making; 2018 Oct; 38(7):834-848. PubMed ID: 30102868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Indirect comparisons of treatments based on systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials.
Edwards SJ; Clarke MJ; Wordsworth S; Borrill J
Int J Clin Pract; 2009 Jun; 63(6):841-54. PubMed ID: 19490195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Modelling heterogeneity variances in multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis--are informative priors the better solution?
Thorlund K; Thabane L; Mills EJ
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2013 Jan; 13():2. PubMed ID: 23311298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessing uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analyses: application to a complex decision model.
Parmigiani G; Samsa GP; Ancukiewicz M; Lipscomb J; Hasselblad V; Matchar DB
Med Decis Making; 1997; 17(4):390-401. PubMed ID: 9343797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluating novel agent effects in multiple-treatments meta-regression.
Salanti G; Dias S; Welton NJ; Ades AE; Golfinopoulos V; Kyrgiou M; Mauri D; Ioannidis JP
Stat Med; 2010 Oct; 29(23):2369-83. PubMed ID: 20687172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mix and match. A simulation study on the impact of mixed-treatment comparison methods on health-economic outcomes.
Vemer P; Al MJ; Oppe M; Rutten-van Mölken MP
PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0171292. PubMed ID: 28152099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment.
Sutton A; Ades AE; Cooper N; Abrams K
Pharmacoeconomics; 2008; 26(9):753-67. PubMed ID: 18767896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
