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 *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21393558)

  • 1. Addressing adoption and research design decisions simultaneously: the role of value of sample information analysis.
    McKenna C; Claxton K
    Med Decis Making; 2011; 31(6):853-65. PubMed ID: 21393558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Informing a decision framework for when NICE should recommend the use of health technologies only in the context of an appropriately designed programme of evidence development.
    Claxton K; Palmer S; Longworth L; Bojke L; Griffin S; McKenna C; Soares M; Spackman E; Youn J
    Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(46):1-323. PubMed ID: 23177626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. When is enough evidence enough? - Using systematic decision analysis and value-of-information analysis to determine the need for further evidence.
    Siebert U; Rochau U; Claxton K
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2013; 107(9-10):575-84. PubMed ID: 24315327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A Comprehensive Algorithm for Approval of Health Technologies With, Without, or Only in Research: The Key Principles for Informing Coverage Decisions.
    Claxton K; Palmer S; Longworth L; Bojke L; Griffin S; Soares M; Spackman E; Rothery C
    Value Health; 2016; 19(6):885-891. PubMed ID: 27712718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Time and expected value of sample information wait for no patient.
    Eckermann S; Willan AR
    Value Health; 2008; 11(3):522-6. PubMed ID: 18179665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Balancing costs and benefits at different stages of medical innovation: a systematic review of Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA).
    Wahlster P; Goetghebeur M; Kriza C; Niederländer C; Kolominsky-Rabas P;
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2015 Jul; 15():262. PubMed ID: 26152122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How to develop cost-conscious guidelines.
    Eccles M; Mason J
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(16):1-69. PubMed ID: 11427188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The value of value of information: best informing research design and prioritization using current methods.
    Eckermann S; Karnon J; Willan AR
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(9):699-709. PubMed ID: 20629473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.
    Allen D; Gillen E; Rixson L
    JBI Libr Syst Rev; 2009; 7(3):80-129. PubMed ID: 27820426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dangerous omissions: the consequences of ignoring decision uncertainty.
    Griffin SC; Claxton KP; Palmer SJ; Sculpher MJ
    Health Econ; 2011 Feb; 20(2):212-24. PubMed ID: 20091763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The option value of delay in health technology assessment.
    Eckermann S; Willan AR
    Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(3):300-5. PubMed ID: 18480035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Value of information methods for planning and analyzing clinical studies optimize decision making and research planning.
    Willan AR; Goeree R; Boutis K
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2012 Aug; 65(8):870-6. PubMed ID: 22609138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Conducting Value for Money Analyses for Non-randomised Interventional Studies Including Service Evaluations: An Educational Review with Recommendations.
    Franklin M; Lomas J; Richardson G
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2020 Jul; 38(7):665-681. PubMed ID: 32291596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Eliciting stated preferences for health-technology adoption criteria using paired comparisons and recommendation judgments.
    Johnson FR; Backhouse M
    Value Health; 2006; 9(5):303-11. PubMed ID: 16961548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The ISPOR Good Practices for Quality Improvement of Cost-Effectiveness Research Task Force Report.
    McGhan WF; Al M; Doshi JA; Kamae I; Marx SE; Rindress D
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1086-99. PubMed ID: 19744291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA.
    Eckermann S; Willan AR
    Health Econ; 2007 Feb; 16(2):195-209. PubMed ID: 16981193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of aldosterone antagonists for postmyocardial infarction heart failure.
    McKenna C; Burch J; Suekarran S; Walker S; Bakhai A; Witte K; Harden M; Wright K; Woolacott N; Lorgelly P; Fenwick L; Palmer S
    Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(24):1-162. PubMed ID: 20492762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The use of economic evaluations in NHS decision-making: a review and empirical investigation.
    Williams I; McIver S; Moore D; Bryan S
    Health Technol Assess; 2008 Apr; 12(7):iii, ix-x, 1-175. PubMed ID: 18373906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Early cost-effectiveness modeling for better decisions in public research investment of personalized medicine technologies.
    Ling DI; Lynd LD; Harrison M; Anis AH; Bansback N
    J Comp Eff Res; 2019 Jan; 8(1):7-19. PubMed ID: 30525982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.