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 *

184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19366496)

  • 101. Making a decision to wait for more evidence: when the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends a technology only in the context of research.
    Chalkidou K; Hoy A; Littlejohns P
    J R Soc Med; 2007 Oct; 100(10):453-60. PubMed ID: 17911127
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 102. Health technology reassessment in the Brazilian public health system: Analysis of the current status.
    Pereira VC; Barreto JOM; Neves FADR
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(7):e0220131. PubMed ID: 31356609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 103. Learning by doing: the value of case studies of health impact assessment.
    Harris-Roxas BF; Harris PJ
    N S W Public Health Bull; 2007; 18(9-10):161-3. PubMed ID: 17949583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 104. Basis for decisions on emerging health technology. A Danish feasibility study.
    Jørgensen T; Larsen LG
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1998; 14(4):624-35. PubMed ID: 9885452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 105. Describe decision-making systems, assess health technology assessment reports.
    Henshall C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2012 Apr; 28(2):168. PubMed ID: 22559759
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 106. Status and potential of gene therapy in clinical medicine. Assessment of an emerging health technology through systematic survey of clinical gene therapy protocols and published results.
    Lyngstadaas A
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2002; 18(3):645-74. PubMed ID: 12391957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 107. Improving the process of developing technical reports for health care decision makers: using the theory of constraints in the evidence-based practice centers.
    Patwardhan MB; Sarría-Santamera A; Matchar DB
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2006; 22(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 16673677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 108. Technology assessment in medicine.
    Littenberg B
    Acad Med; 1992 Jul; 67(7):424-8. PubMed ID: 1616553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 109. Vox populi and public policy: why should we care?
    Miller HI
    Nat Biotechnol; 2003 Dec; 21(12):1431-2. PubMed ID: 14647319
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 110. Towards a New Framework for Addressing Structural Uncertainty in Health Technology Assessment Guidelines.
    Ghabri S; Cleemput I; Josselin JM
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Feb; 36(2):127-130. PubMed ID: 29264865
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 111. Which health technologies should be funded? A prioritization framework based explicitly on value for money.
    Golan O; Hansen P
    Isr J Health Policy Res; 2012 Nov; 1(1):44. PubMed ID: 23181391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 112. The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy.
    Schünemann HJ; Reinap M; Piggott T; Laidmäe E; Köhler K; Pōld M; Ens B; Irs A; Akl EA; Cuello CA; Falavigna M; Gibbens M; Neamtiu L; Parmelli E; Jameleddine M; Pyke L; Verstijnen I; Alonso-Coello P; Tugwell P; Zhang Y; Saz-Parkinson Z; Kuchenmüller T; Moja L
    Lancet Public Health; 2022 Apr; 7(4):e378-e390. PubMed ID: 35366410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 113. Linking ecological science to decision-making: delivering environmental monitoring information as societal feedback.
    Vaughan H; Whitelaw G; Craig B; Stewart C
    Environ Monit Assess; 2003; 88(1-3):399-408. PubMed ID: 14570425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 114. Are we measuring what matters in health technology assessment of disease management? Systematic literature review.
    Steuten L; Vrijhoef B; Severens H; van Merode F; Spreeuwenberg C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2006; 22(1):47-57. PubMed ID: 16673680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 115. Evaluating in vitro fertilization technology in Australia.
    Rutnam R
    Community Health Stud; 1990; 14(3):246-54. PubMed ID: 2253459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 116. Introduction. Bayesian approaches to technology assessment and decision making.
    Luce BR; Shih YC; Claxton K
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 11329837
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 117. Priority-setting, the Indian way.
    Rao NV; Downey L; Jain N; Baru R; Cluzeau F
    J Glob Health; 2018 Dec; 8(2):020311. PubMed ID: 30479747
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 118. Evidence and Australian health policy.
    Van Der Weyden MB; Armstrong RM
    Med J Aust; 2004 Jun; 180(12):607-8. PubMed ID: 15200355
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 119. Introduction: needs-based technology assessment. Who can afford not to use it?
    Bergevin Y; Tugwell P
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1995; 11(4):647-9. PubMed ID: 8567196
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 120. Framework for the analysis of nanotechnologies' impacts and ethical acceptability: basis of an interdisciplinary approach to assessing novel technologies.
    Patenaude J; Legault GA; Beauvais J; Bernier L; Béland JP; Boissy P; Chenel V; Daniel CÉ; Genest J; Poirier MS; Tapin D
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2015 Apr; 21(2):293-315. PubMed ID: 24728612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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