170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18435429)
41. Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access: a review of methods and applications.
Ijzerman MJ; Steuten LM
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2011 Sep; 9(5):331-47. PubMed ID: 21875163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Should commercial-in-confidence data be used by decision makers when making assessments of cost-effectiveness?
Drummond M
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2002; 1(2):53-4. PubMed ID: 14619251
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Modeling participation in the NHII: operations research approach.
Brennan PF; Ferris M; Robinson S; Wright S; Marquard J
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2005; 2005():76-80. PubMed ID: 16779005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. The Optimal Sample Size for Usability Testing, From the Manufacturer's Perspective: A Value-of-Information Approach.
Caron A; Vandewalle V; Marcilly R; Rochat J; Dervaux B
Value Health; 2022 Jan; 25(1):116-124. PubMed ID: 35031090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A
Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Your tax dollars at work! or the APPLES trial bears fruit.
Phillips B
J Clin Sleep Med; 2008 Oct; 4(5):419-20. PubMed ID: 18853697
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. 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]
48. Bayesian methods for design and analysis of cost-effectiveness trials in the evaluation of health care technologies.
O'Hagan A; Stevens JW
Stat Methods Med Res; 2002 Dec; 11(6):469-90. PubMed ID: 12516985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Health technology assessment and primary data collection for reducing uncertainty in decision making.
Goeree R; Levin L; Chandra K; Bowen JM; Blackhouse G; Tarride JE; Burke N; Bischof M; Xie F; O'Reilly D
J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 May; 6(5):332-42. PubMed ID: 19394574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II-An ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report.
Ramsey SD; Willke RJ; Glick H; Reed SD; Augustovski F; Jonsson B; Briggs A; Sullivan SD
Value Health; 2015 Mar; 18(2):161-72. PubMed ID: 25773551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Health technology assessment of medical devices: What is different? An overview of three European projects.
Schnell-Inderst P; Mayer J; Lauterberg J; Hunger T; Arvandi M; Conrads-Frank A; Nachtnebel A; Wild C; Siebert U
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2015; 109(4-5):309-18. PubMed ID: 26354131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. When is enough evidence enough? - Using systematic decision analysis and value-of-information analysis to determine the need for further evidence.
Siebert U; Rochau U; Claxton K
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2013; 107(9-10):575-84. PubMed ID: 24315327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Optimal decision rules for HTA under uncertainty: a wider, dynamic perspective.
Forster M; Pertile P
Health Econ; 2013 Dec; 22(12):1507-14. PubMed ID: 23225192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Comparative costs and activity from a sample of UK clinical trials units.
Hind D; Reeves BC; Bathers S; Bray C; Corkhill A; Hayward C; Harper L; Napp V; Norrie J; Speed C; Tremain L; Keat N; Bradburn M
Trials; 2017 May; 18(1):203. PubMed ID: 28464930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Estimating country-specific cost-effectiveness from multinational clinical trials.
Willke RJ; Glick HA; Polsky D; Schulman K
Health Econ; 1998 Sep; 7(6):481-93. PubMed ID: 9809707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. United Kingdom Alcohol Treatment Trial (UKATT): hypotheses, design and methods.
UKATT Research Team
Alcohol Alcohol; 2001; 36(1):11-21. PubMed ID: 11139410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Standardizing economic appraisal of health technology in the European Community.
Rovira J
Soc Sci Med; 1994 Jun; 38(12):1675-8. PubMed ID: 8047926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Sample size determination for cost-effectiveness trials.
Willan AR
Pharmacoeconomics; 2011 Nov; 29(11):933-49. PubMed ID: 21988292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. How can health economics be used in the design and analysis of adaptive clinical trials? A qualitative analysis.
Flight L; Julious S; Brennan A; Todd S; Hind D
Trials; 2020 Mar; 21(1):252. PubMed ID: 32143728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Economic evaluation and the rational diffusion and use of health technology.
Drummond MF
Health Policy; 1987 Jun; 7(3):309-24. PubMed ID: 10312123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
