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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21310854)

  • 21. Use of Patient Preferences Data Regarding Multiple Risks to Inform Regulatory Decisions.
    Montano-Campos JF; Gonzalez JM; Rickert T; Fairchild AO; Levitan B; Reed SD
    MDM Policy Pract; 2023; 8(1):23814683221148715. PubMed ID: 36654678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. An evaluation of health care expenditures in Crohn's disease using the United States Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2003 to 2013.
    Bounthavong M; Li M; Watanabe JH
    Res Social Adm Pharm; 2017; 13(3):530-538. PubMed ID: 27263802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Attribute attention and option attention in risky choice.
    Zilker V; Pachur T
    Cognition; 2023 Jul; 236():105441. PubMed ID: 37058827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparing preferences for outcomes of psoriasis treatments among patients and dermatologists in the U.K.: results from a discrete-choice experiment.
    Gonzalez JM; Johnson FR; McAteer H; Posner J; Mughal F
    Br J Dermatol; 2017 Mar; 176(3):777-785. PubMed ID: 27292093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force.
    Hauber AB; González JM; Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG; Prior T; Marshall DA; Cunningham C; IJzerman MJ; Bridges JF
    Value Health; 2016 Jun; 19(4):300-15. PubMed ID: 27325321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Patient centered decision making: use of conjoint analysis to determine risk-benefit trade-offs for preference sensitive treatment choices.
    Wilson L; Loucks A; Bui C; Gipson G; Zhong L; Schwartzburg A; Crabtree E; Goodin D; Waubant E; McCulloch C
    J Neurol Sci; 2014 Sep; 344(1-2):80-7. PubMed ID: 25037284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. An Empirical Comparison of Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling to Estimate Stakeholders' Risk Tolerance for Hip Replacement Surgery.
    van Dijk JD; Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG; Marshall DA; IJzerman MJ
    Value Health; 2016 Jun; 19(4):316-22. PubMed ID: 27325322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Patients' benefit-risk preferences for chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura therapies.
    Hauber AB; Johnson FR; Grotzinger KM; Ozdemir S
    Ann Pharmacother; 2010 Mar; 44(3):479-88. PubMed ID: 20124463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evaluating Expected Costs and Benefits of Granting Access to New Treatments on the Basis of Progression-Free Survival in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.
    Lakdawalla DN; Chou JW; Linthicum MT; MacEwan JP; Zhang J; Goldman DP
    JAMA Oncol; 2015 May; 1(2):196-202. PubMed ID: 26181023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Preferences for antiviral therapy of chronic hepatitis C: a discrete choice experiment.
    Mühlbacher AC; Bridges JF; Bethge S; Dintsios CM; Schwalm A; Gerber-Grote A; Nübling M
    Eur J Health Econ; 2017 Mar; 18(2):155-165. PubMed ID: 26846922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Evaluating Risk Tolerance from a Systematic Review of Preferences: The Case of Patients with Psoriasis.
    Gonzalez JM
    Patient; 2018 Jun; 11(3):285-300. PubMed ID: 29332301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Relationship between disease severity, quality of life and health-care resource use in a cross-section of Australian patients with Crohn's disease.
    Gibson PR; Weston AR; Shann A; Florin TH; Lawrance IC; Macrae FA; Radford-Smith G
    J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2007 Aug; 22(8):1306-12. PubMed ID: 17559375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Patients' preferences for treatment outcomes for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a conjoint analysis.
    Bridges JF; Mohamed AF; Finnern HW; Woehl A; Hauber AB
    Lung Cancer; 2012 Jul; 77(1):224-31. PubMed ID: 22369719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Shifted risk preferences in pathological gambling.
    Ligneul R; Sescousse G; Barbalat G; Domenech P; Dreher JC
    Psychol Med; 2013 May; 43(5):1059-68. PubMed ID: 22932231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A new and more robust test of QALYs.
    Doctor JN; Bleichrodt H; Miyamoto J; Temkin NR; Dikmen S
    J Health Econ; 2004 Mar; 23(2):353-67. PubMed ID: 15019761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Patient preferences and cost-utility analysis.
    Elnitsky CA; Stone P
    Appl Nurs Res; 2005 May; 18(2):74-6. PubMed ID: 15991103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Nonlinear probability weighting can reflect attentional biases in sequential sampling.
    Zilker V; Pachur T
    Psychol Rev; 2022 Oct; 129(5):949-975. PubMed ID: 34370495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Caregiver preferences for emerging duchenne muscular dystrophy treatments: a comparison of best-worst scaling and conjoint analysis.
    Hollin IL; Peay HL; Bridges JF
    Patient; 2015 Feb; 8(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 25523316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Survival or Mortality: Does Risk Attribute Framing Influence Decision-Making Behavior in a Discrete Choice Experiment?
    Veldwijk J; Essers BA; Lambooij MS; Dirksen CD; Smit HA; de Wit GA
    Value Health; 2016; 19(2):202-9. PubMed ID: 27021754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Correcting biases in standard gamble and time tradeoff utilities.
    van Osch SM; Wakker PP; van den Hout WB; Stiggelbout AM
    Med Decis Making; 2004; 24(5):511-7. PubMed ID: 15359000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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