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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19787847)

  • 41. How dead is dead? Qualitative findings from participants of combined traditional and lead-time time trade-off valuations.
    Al Sayah F; Mladenovic A; Gaebel K; Xie F; Johnson JA
    Qual Life Res; 2016 Jan; 25(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 26216584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. An exploration of the non-iterative time trade-off method to value health states.
    Feng Y; Hole AR; Karimi M; Tsuchiya A; van Hout B
    Health Econ; 2018 Aug; 27(8):1247-1263. PubMed ID: 29774632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Learning effects in time trade-off based valuation of EQ-5D health states.
    Augestad LA; Rand-Hendriksen K; Kristiansen IS; Stavem K
    Value Health; 2012; 15(2):340-5. PubMed ID: 22433766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Comparison of different valuation methods for population health status measured by the EQ-5D in three European countries.
    Bernert S; Fernández A; Haro JM; König HH; Alonso J; Vilagut G; Sevilla-Dedieu C; de Graaf R; Matschinger H; Heider D; Angermeyer MC;
    Value Health; 2009; 12(5):750-8. PubMed ID: 19490564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods.
    Attema AE; Edelaar-Peeters Y; Versteegh MM; Stolk EA
    Eur J Health Econ; 2013 Jul; 14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S53-64. PubMed ID: 23900665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Utility values in the visually impaired: comparing time-trade off and VisQoL.
    Gothwal VK; Bagga DK
    Optom Vis Sci; 2013 Aug; 90(8):843-54. PubMed ID: 23628757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Inconsistencies in TTO and VAS values for EQ-5D health states.
    Lamers LM; Stalmeier PF; Krabbe PF; Busschbach JJ
    Med Decis Making; 2006; 26(2):173-81. PubMed ID: 16525171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Using time trade-off methods to assess preferences over health care delivery options: a feasibility study.
    Guo J; Konetzka RT; Dale W
    Value Health; 2014 Mar; 17(2):302-5. PubMed ID: 24636391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Association between time preference, present-bias and physical activity: implications for designing behavior change interventions.
    Hunter RF; Tang J; Hutchinson G; Chilton S; Holmes D; Kee F
    BMC Public Health; 2018 Dec; 18(1):1388. PubMed ID: 30567532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure.
    Netten A; Burge P; Malley J; Potoglou D; Towers AM; Brazier J; Flynn T; Forder J; Wall B
    Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(16):1-166. PubMed ID: 22459668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A comparison of individual and social time trade-off values for health states in the general population.
    Burström K; Johannesson M; Diderichsen F
    Health Policy; 2006 May; 76(3):359-70. PubMed ID: 16214258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Valuing Health Using Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiment Methods: Does Dimension Order Impact on Health State Values?
    Mulhern B; Shah K; Janssen MF; Longworth L; Ibbotson R
    Value Health; 2016; 19(2):210-7. PubMed ID: 27021755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Valuation of Quality Weights for EuroQol 5-Dimensional Health States With the Time Trade-Off Method in the Capital of Iran.
    Goudarzi R; Sari AA; Zeraati H; Rashidian A; Mohammad K; Amini S
    Value Health Reg Issues; 2019 May; 18():170-175. PubMed ID: 31096140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Altruistic Preferences in Time Tradeoff: Consideration of Effects on Others in Health State Valuations.
    Krol M; Attema AE; van Exel J; Brouwer W
    Med Decis Making; 2016 Feb; 36(2):187-98. PubMed ID: 26552410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health.
    Griebsch I; Coast J; Brown J
    Pediatrics; 2005 May; 115(5):e600-14. PubMed ID: 15867026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Private and social time preference for health outcomes: A general population survey in Iran.
    Mahboub-Ahari A; Pourreza A; Akbari Sari A; Sheldon TA; Moeeni M
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(2):e0211545. PubMed ID: 30707731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Roughly right or precisely wrong? Systematic review of quality-of-life weights elicited with the time trade-off method.
    Arnesen T; Trommald M
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2004 Jan; 9(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 15006240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Interpretation of health and vision utilities in low vision patients.
    Malkin AG; Goldstein JE; Massof RW
    Optom Vis Sci; 2012 Mar; 89(3):288-95. PubMed ID: 22227913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The "utility" of the Time Trade-Off method in cancer patients: feasibility and proportional Trade-Off.
    Stiggelbout AM; Kiebert GM; Kievit J; Leer JW; Habbema JD; De Haes JC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1995 Oct; 48(10):1207-14. PubMed ID: 7561982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Social preferences for health states associated with acute myeloid leukemia for patients undergoing treatment in the United Kingdom.
    Castejón N; Cappelleri JC; Cuervo J; Lang K; Mehta P; Mokgokong R; Mamolo C
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2018 Apr; 16(1):66. PubMed ID: 29669568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.