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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17067199)

  • 1. Economic evaluations in the canadian common drug review.
    Laupacis A
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2006; 24(11):1157-62. PubMed ID: 17067199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Medicine reimbursement recommendations in Canada, Australia, and Scotland.
    Lexchin J; Mintzes B
    Am J Manag Care; 2008 Sep; 14(9):581-8. PubMed ID: 18778173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Using pharmacoeconomic analysis to make drug insurance coverage decisions.
    Anis AH; Rahman T; Schechter MT
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1998 Jan; 13(1 Pt 2):119-26. PubMed ID: 10176146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Making a case for employing a societal perspective in the evaluation of Medicaid prescription drug interventions.
    Roy S; Madhavan SS
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2008; 26(4):281-96. PubMed ID: 18370564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Institutional formularies: the relevance of pharmacoeconomic analysis to formulary decisions.
    Lipsy RJ
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1992 Apr; 1(4):265-81. PubMed ID: 10147017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The role of economic evidence in Canadian oncology reimbursement decision-making: to lambda and beyond.
    Rocchi A; Menon D; Verma S; Miller E
    Value Health; 2008; 11(4):771-83. PubMed ID: 18179658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Cost-effectiveness of new drugs impacts reimbursement decision making but room for improvement].
    Hoomans T; van der Roer N; Severens JL; Delwel GO
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2010; 154():A958. PubMed ID: 20699045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses to price and reimbursement decisions in Austria].
    Führlinger S
    Wien Med Wochenschr; 2006 Dec; 156(23-24):612-8. PubMed ID: 17211765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Ontario's formulary committee: how recommendations are made.
    PausJenssen AM; Singer PA; Detsky AS
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2003; 21(4):285-94. PubMed ID: 12600223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Common Drug Review recommendations: an evidence base for expectations?
    Rocchi A; Miller E; Hopkins RB; Goeree R
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2012 Mar; 30(3):229-46. PubMed ID: 22283689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices: Cost Savings.
    Steiner DJ;
    Issue Brief Health Policy Track Serv; 2015 Dec; ():1-31. PubMed ID: 27116794
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A synthesis of drug reimbursement decision-making processes in organisation for economic co-operation and development countries.
    Barnieh L; Manns B; Harris A; Blom M; Donaldson C; Klarenbach S; Husereau D; Lorenzetti D; Clement F
    Value Health; 2014; 17(1):98-108. PubMed ID: 24438723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The role of pharmacoeconomic guidelines for formulary approval: the Australian experience.
    Langley PC
    Clin Ther; 1993; 15(6):1154-76; discussion 1120. PubMed ID: 8111812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Good research practices for measuring drug costs in cost-effectiveness analyses: Medicare, Medicaid and other US government payers perspectives: the ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force report--Part IV.
    Mullins CD; Seal B; Seoane-Vazquez E; Sankaranarayanan J; Asche CV; Jayadevappa R; Lee WC; Romanus DK; Wang J; Hay JW; Smeeding J
    Value Health; 2010; 13(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 19807903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Do drug formulary policies reflect evidence of value?
    Neumann PJ; Lin PJ; Greenberg D; Berger M; Teutsch S; Mansley E; Weinstein MC; Rosen AB
    Am J Manag Care; 2006 Jan; 12(1):30-6. PubMed ID: 16402886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada.
    Clement FM; Harris A; Li JJ; Yong K; Lee KM; Manns BJ
    JAMA; 2009 Oct; 302(13):1437-43. PubMed ID: 19809025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Inter-provincial variation in government drug formularies.
    Grégoire JP; MacNeil P; Skilton K; Moisan J; Menon D; Jacobs P; McKenzie E; Ferguson B
    Can J Public Health; 2001; 92(4):307-12. PubMed ID: 11962119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. National reimbursement listing determinants of new cancer drugs: a retrospective analysis of 58 cancer treatment appraisals in 2007-2016 in South Korea.
    Kim ES; Kim JA; Lee EK
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2017 Aug; 17(4):401-409. PubMed ID: 28010146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Common errors and controversies in pharmacoeconomic analyses.
    Byford S; Palmer S
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1998 Jun; 13(6):659-66. PubMed ID: 10179701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Same drugs, valued differently? Comparing comparators and methods used in reimbursement recommendations in Australia, Canada, and Korea.
    Bae G; Bae EY; Bae S
    Health Policy; 2015 May; 119(5):577-87. PubMed ID: 25666339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.