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 *

192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16768926)

  • 21. Impact of CEDIT recommendations: An example of health technology assessment in a hospital network.
    Bodeau-Livinec F; Simon E; Montagnier-Petrissans C; Joël ME; Féry-Lemonnier E
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2006; 22(2):161-8. PubMed ID: 16571191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Factors affecting decisions to adopt medical technologies in acute care hospitals.
    Friedman LH; Myrtle RC
    J Health Hum Serv Adm; 1996; 18(4):466-89. PubMed ID: 10162199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. New technology planning and approval: critical factors for success.
    Haselkorn A; Rosenstein AH; Rao AK; Van Zuiden M; Coye MJ
    Am J Med Qual; 2007; 22(3):164-9. PubMed ID: 17485557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. What decision-makers want and what they have been getting.
    McGregor M
    Value Health; 2006; 9(3):181-5. PubMed ID: 16689712
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A method to evaluate the role of stakeholder dynamics in IT based innovation adoption processes.
    Postema T
    World Hosp Health Serv; 2010; 46(2):12-5. PubMed ID: 21053651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [The Danish Health Technology Assessment model. A systematic review of Danish HTAs published by CEMTV from 1998 to 2004].
    Draborg EU
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2006 May; 168(21):2074-8. PubMed ID: 16768927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Practitioner approaches to the integration of clinical decision support system technology in critical care.
    Weber S; Crago EA; Sherwood PR; Smith T
    J Nurs Adm; 2009 Nov; 39(11):465-9. PubMed ID: 19898097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Resource allocation and health technology assessment in Australia: views from the local level.
    Gallego G; van Gool K; Kelleher D
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):134-40. PubMed ID: 19331706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Managed care: technology assessment and technology control.
    Sennett C
    J Insur Med; 1992; 24(3):182-5. PubMed ID: 10147827
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A view from inside Arizona and New Mexico Indian country: pursuing a health career path.
    Overman BA; Petri L; Knoki-Wilson U
    Rural Remote Health; 2007; 7(2):682. PubMed ID: 17523855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Family perceptions of end-of-life care in an urban ICU.
    Kjerulf M; Regehr C; Popova SR; Baker AJ
    Dynamics; 2005; 16(3):22-5. PubMed ID: 17725265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Does health technology assessment benefit health services and politics? The experiences of an established HTA institution: the Danish Centre for Evaluation and HTA.
    Sigmund H; Kristensen FB
    Eur J Health Econ; 2002; 3(1):54-8. PubMed ID: 15609118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Role of health technology assessment in shaping the benefits package in The Netherlands.
    Stolk EA; de Bont A; van Halteren AR; Bijlmer RJ; Poley MJ
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2009 Feb; 9(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 19371181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Nurses' experience of collaboration with relatives of frail elderly patients in acute hospital wards: a qualitative study.
    Lindhardt T; Hallberg IR; Poulsen I
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2008 May; 45(5):668-81. PubMed ID: 17362957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Presentation of economic evaluation results.
    Chaikledkaew U; Teerawattananon Y
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2008 Jun; 91 Suppl 2():S66-73. PubMed ID: 19253489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Technology development from the perspective of industry.
    Abele JE
    J Invasive Cardiol; 1993 Mar; 5(2):65-8. PubMed ID: 10171667
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. A qualitative analysis of how advanced practice nurses use clinical decision support systems.
    Weber S
    J Am Acad Nurse Pract; 2007 Dec; 19(12):652-67. PubMed ID: 18042131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Human factors engineering: a tool for medical device evaluation in hospital procurement decision-making.
    Ginsburg G
    J Biomed Inform; 2005 Jun; 38(3):213-9. PubMed ID: 15896694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Six years' experience with interdisciplinary review teams in health technology assessment in Norway.
    Håheim LL; Mørland B; Wisløff TF; Lyngstadaas A
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2005; 21(4):526-31. PubMed ID: 16262979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Evaluation of quality in health services].
    Lidegaard O; Andreasen PB; Steensen JP
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1989 Apr; 151(15):924-7. PubMed ID: 2711504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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