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 *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20942984)

  • 1. Supporting tough decisions in Norway: a healthcare system approach.
    Mørland B; Ringard A; Røttingen JA
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2010 Oct; 26(4):398-404. PubMed ID: 20942984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Fairness and accountability for reasonableness. Do the views of priority setting decision makers differ across health systems and levels of decision making?
    Kapiriri L; Norheim OF; Martin DK
    Soc Sci Med; 2009 Feb; 68(4):766-73. PubMed ID: 19070414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Priority setting in healthcare: towards guidelines for the program budgeting and marginal analysis framework.
    Peacock SJ; Mitton C; Ruta D; Donaldson C; Bate A; Hedden L
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2010 Oct; 10(5):539-52. PubMed ID: 20950070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Priority-setting for healthcare: who, how, and is it fair?
    Menon D; Stafinski T; Martin D
    Health Policy; 2007 Dec; 84(2-3):220-33. PubMed ID: 17628202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Attitudes towards priority-setting and rationing in healthcare -- an exploratory survey of Swedish medical students.
    Omar F; Tinghög G; Tinghög P; Carlsson P
    Scand J Public Health; 2009 Mar; 37(2):122-30. PubMed ID: 19141543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Supporting the use of health technology assessments in policy making about health systems.
    Lavis JN; Wilson MG; Grimshaw JM; Haynes RB; Ouimet M; Raina P; Gruen RL; Graham ID
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2010 Oct; 26(4):405-14. PubMed ID: 20923592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Linking evidence from health technology assessments to policy and decision making: the Alberta model.
    Borowski HZ; Brehaut J; Hailey D
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 17493300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Priority setting and the ethics of resource allocation within VA healthcare facilities: results of a survey.
    Foglia MB; Pearlman RA; Bottrell MM; Altemose JA; Fox E
    Organ Ethic; 2008; 4(2):83-96. PubMed ID: 18839751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Thai health technology assessment guideline development.
    Teerawattananon Y; Chaikledkaew U
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2008 Jun; 91 Suppl 2():S11-5. PubMed ID: 19253483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions.
    Drummond MF; Schwartz JS; Jönsson B; Luce BR; Neumann PJ; Siebert U; Sullivan SD
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2008; 24(3):244-58; discussion 362-8. PubMed ID: 18601792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reflections on science, judgment, and value in evidence-based decision making: a conversation with David Eddy by Sean R. Tunis.
    Eddy D
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2007; 26(4):w500-15. PubMed ID: 17580317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Health technology assessment for resource allocation decisions: are key principles relevant for Latin America?
    Pichon-Riviere A; Augustovski F; Rubinstein A; Martí SG; Sullivan SD; Drummond MF
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2010 Oct; 26(4):421-7. PubMed ID: 20942985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Role of health technology assessment in shaping the benefits package in The Netherlands.
    Stolk EA; de Bont A; van Halteren AR; Bijlmer RJ; Poley MJ
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2009 Feb; 9(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 19371181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Resource allocation and health technology assessment in Australia: views from the local level.
    Gallego G; van Gool K; Kelleher D
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):134-40. PubMed ID: 19331706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Beyond evidence--to ethics: a decision-making framework for health promotion, public health and health improvement.
    Tannahill A
    Health Promot Int; 2008 Dec; 23(4):380-90. PubMed ID: 18971394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Criteria and procedures for determining benefit packages in health care. A comparative perspective.
    Gress S; Niebuhr D; Rothgang H; Wasem J
    Health Policy; 2005 Jul; 73(1):78-91. PubMed ID: 15911059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Priority setting in health policy in Sweden and a comparison with Norway.
    Calltorp J
    Health Policy; 1999 Dec; 50(1-2):1-22. PubMed ID: 10827297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Emerging health technologies: informing and supporting health policy early.
    Wild C; Langer T
    Health Policy; 2008 Aug; 87(2):160-71. PubMed ID: 18295925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evidence informed decision-making in healthcare: the case for health technology assessment.
    Juzwishin DW
    World Hosp Health Serv; 2010; 46(1):10-2. PubMed ID: 20614678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.