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.
165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18619702)
1. From cost-effectiveness information to decision-making on liquid-based cytology: Mind the gap. Legood R; Wolstenholme J; Gray A Health Policy; 2009 Feb; 89(2):193-200. PubMed ID: 18619702 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Use of economic evaluation in local health care decision-making in England: a qualitative investigation. Eddama O; Coast J Health Policy; 2009 Mar; 89(3):261-70. PubMed ID: 18657336 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cost-effectiveness analysis and formulary decision making in England: findings from research. Williams IP; Bryan S Soc Sci Med; 2007 Nov; 65(10):2116-29. PubMed ID: 17698271 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Putting National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance into practice: a cost minimization model of a national roll-out of liquid based cytology in England. Stoykova B; Kuzmanov G; Dowie R Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2008; 24(4):391-8. PubMed ID: 18828932 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-effectiveness analysis in relation to budgetary constraints and reallocative restrictions. Adang E; Voordijk L; Jan van der Wilt G; Ament A Health Policy; 2005 Oct; 74(2):146-56. PubMed ID: 16153475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany]. Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Developing and testing a cost-assessment tool for cancer screening programs. Subramanian S; Ekwueme DU; Gardner JG; Trogdon J Am J Prev Med; 2009 Sep; 37(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 19666160 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The health and economic impact of cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus vaccination in kidney transplant recipients. Wong G; Howard K; Webster A; Chapman JR; Craig JC Transplantation; 2009 Apr; 87(7):1078-91. PubMed ID: 19352131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Decision making the explicit evidence-based way: comparing benefits, harms and costs. McArthur J; Dickinson A Nurs Prax N Z; 1999 Mar; 14(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 10481662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [More care for a limited budget; a case for a better use of the efficiency criteria]. Rutten FF; Brouwer WB Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2002 Nov; 146(47):2254-8. PubMed ID: 12481524 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Reimbursement and clinical guidance for pharmaceuticals in Sweden: do health-economic evaluations support decision making? Anell A; Persson U Eur J Health Econ; 2005 Sep; 6(3):274-9. PubMed ID: 15968561 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The use of cost-effectiveness by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): no(t yet an) exemplar of a deliberative process. Schlander M J Med Ethics; 2008 Jul; 34(7):534-9. PubMed ID: 18591289 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The lag between effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence of new drugs. Implications for decision-making in health care. Stoykova B; Drummond M; Barbieri M; Kleijnen J Eur J Health Econ; 2003 Nov; 4(4):313-8. PubMed ID: 15609202 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Benefits, cost requirements and cost-effectiveness of the HPV16,18 vaccine for cervical cancer prevention in developing countries: policy implications. Goldie SJ; O'Shea M; Diaz M; Kim SY Reprod Health Matters; 2008 Nov; 16(32):86-96. PubMed ID: 19027626 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Screening, prevention and treatment of cervical cancer -- a global and regional generalized cost-effectiveness analysis. Ginsberg GM; Edejer TT; Lauer JA; Sepulveda C Vaccine; 2009 Oct; 27(43):6060-79. PubMed ID: 19647813 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]