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 *

295 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17090557)

  • 1. Getting to 'smart' health care.
    Clancy CM
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2006; 25(6):w589-92. PubMed ID: 17090557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Can a center for comparative effectiveness information succeed? Perspectives from a health care company.
    Buto K; Juhn P
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2006; 25(6):w586-8. PubMed ID: 17090556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Developing a center for comparative effectiveness information.
    Wilensky GR
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2006; 25(6):w572-85. PubMed ID: 17090555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The emerging context for advances in comparative effectiveness assessment.
    Rowe JW; Cortese DA; McGinnis JM
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2006; 25(6):w593-5. PubMed ID: 17090558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Role of technology assessment in health benefits coverage for medical devices.
    Braslow NM; Shatin D; McCarthy DB; Newcomer LN
    Am J Manag Care; 1998 Sep; 4 Spec No():SP139-50. PubMed ID: 10185990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Technology assessment in healthcare: a review and description of a "best practice" technology assessment process.
    Fernandez AM; Schrogie JJ; Wilson WW; Nash DB
    Best Pract Benchmarking Healthc; 1997; 2(6):240-53. PubMed ID: 9543920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Care to compare?
    Aston G
    Hosp Health Netw; 2008 Dec; 82(12):38-41, 1. PubMed ID: 19209502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evidence-based decision-making within Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme.
    Lopert R
    Issue Brief (Commonw Fund); 2009 Jul; 60():1-13. PubMed ID: 19639714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Centers tapped to evaluate technology.
    Moore JD
    Mod Healthc; 1997 Sep; 27(38):20, 22. PubMed ID: 10170392
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health care decision-making.
    Magel JS
    Physician Exec; 1990; 16(3):31-2. PubMed ID: 10113233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Decisions to adopt new technologies at the hospital level: insights from Israeli medical centers.
    Greenberg D; Peterburg Y; Vekstein D; Pliskin JS
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2005; 21(2):219-27. PubMed ID: 15921062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Defining quality health care with outcomes assessment while achieving economic value.
    Shaw LJ; Miller DD
    Top Health Inf Manage; 2000 Feb; 20(3):44-54. PubMed ID: 10747434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach.
    Williams I; Bryan S; McIver S
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2007 Apr; 12(2):73-9. PubMed ID: 17407655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. National Authority for Health: France.
    Rochaix L; Xerri B
    Issue Brief (Commonw Fund); 2009 Jul; 58():1-9. PubMed ID: 19639712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project: a model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of clinical pathways.
    Gooch KL; Smith D; Wasylak T; Faris PD; Marshall DA; Khong H; Hibbert JE; Parker RD; Zernicke RF; Beaupre L; Pearce T; Johnston DW; Frank CB
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):113-23. PubMed ID: 19366494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: introduction and general considerations.
    Manchikanti L
    Pain Physician; 2008; 11(2):161-86. PubMed ID: 18354710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Technology assessment, coverage decisions, and conflict: the role of guidelines.
    Sheingold SH
    Am J Manag Care; 1998 Sep; 4 Spec No():SP117-25. PubMed ID: 10185988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. NICE's use of cost effectiveness as an exemplar of a deliberative process.
    Culyer AJ
    Health Econ Policy Law; 2006 Jul; 1(Pt 3):299-318. PubMed ID: 18634698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Technology framework. A system's five-phase approach integrates values with vision.
    Stempien TL
    Health Prog; 1993; 74(1):58-62. PubMed ID: 10123572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.