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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21959651)

  • 1. Comparison of health state utility values derived using time trade-off, rank and discrete choice data anchored on the full health-dead scale.
    Brazier J; Rowen D; Yang Y; Tsuchiya A
    Eur J Health Econ; 2012 Oct; 13(5):575-87. PubMed ID: 21959651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of methods for converting DCE values onto the full health-dead QALY scale.
    Rowen D; Brazier J; Van Hout B
    Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):328-40. PubMed ID: 25398621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Valuing Child Health Utility 9D health states with a young adolescent sample: a feasibility study to compare best-worst scaling discrete-choice experiment, standard gamble and time trade-off methods.
    Ratcliffe J; Couzner L; Flynn T; Sawyer M; Stevens K; Brazier J; Burgess L
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2011; 9(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 21033766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dealing with the health state 'dead' when using discrete choice experiments to obtain values for EQ-5D-5L heath states.
    Ramos-Goñi JM; Rivero-Arias O; Errea M; Stolk EA; Herdman M; Cabasés JM
    Eur J Health Econ; 2013 Jul; 14 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S33-42. PubMed ID: 23900663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Using DCE and ranking data to estimate cardinal values for health states for deriving a preference-based single index from the sexual quality of life questionnaire.
    Ratcliffe J; Brazier J; Tsuchiya A; Symonds T; Brown M
    Health Econ; 2009 Nov; 18(11):1261-76. PubMed ID: 19142985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Modeling ranking, time trade-off, and visual analog scale values for EQ-5D health states: a review and comparison of methods.
    Craig BM; Busschbach JJ; Salomon JA
    Med Care; 2009 Jun; 47(6):634-41. PubMed ID: 19433996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Is anchoring at 'dead' a theoretical requirement for health state valuation?
    Sampson C; Parkin D; Devlin N
    Health Econ; 2024 Sep; 33(9):1929-1935. PubMed ID: 38831492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Derive Health State Utilities from Ordinal Preference Data.
    Reddy BP; Adams R; Walsh C; Barry M; Kind P
    Value Health; 2015 Sep; 18(6):841-5. PubMed ID: 26409612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Discrete choice modeling for the quantification of health states: the case of the EQ-5D.
    Stolk EA; Oppe M; Scalone L; Krabbe PF
    Value Health; 2010 Dec; 13(8):1005-13. PubMed ID: 20825618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Whose Time Trade-Off Should Be Used? Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Latent Utilities in Health State Valuation.
    Xie S; Wu J; Xie F
    Value Health; 2023 Sep; 26(9):1405-1412. PubMed ID: 37285916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Do Portuguese and UK health state values differ across valuation methods?
    Ferreira LN; Ferreira PL; Rowen D; Brazier JE
    Qual Life Res; 2011 May; 20(4):609-19. PubMed ID: 21061071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Estimating a Preference-Based Single Index Measuring the Quality-of-Life Impact of Self-Management for Diabetes.
    Rowen D; Labeit A; Stevens K; Elliott J; Mulhern B; Carlton J; Basarir H; Brazier J
    Med Decis Making; 2018 Aug; 38(6):699-707. PubMed ID: 29957107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A framework for estimating health state utility values within a discrete choice experiment: modeling risky choices.
    Robinson A; Spencer A; Moffatt P
    Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):341-50. PubMed ID: 25349189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values.
    Bansback N; Brazier J; Tsuchiya A; Anis A
    J Health Econ; 2012 Jan; 31(1):306-18. PubMed ID: 22197308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using the Choice Sequence in Time Trade-Off as Discrete Choices: Do the Two Stories Match?
    Augestad LA; Rand K; Luo N; Barra M
    Value Health; 2020 Apr; 23(4):487-494. PubMed ID: 32327166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Do Discrete Choice Experiments Approaches Perform Better Than Time Trade-Off in Eliciting Health State Utilities? Evidence From SF-6Dv2 in China.
    Xie S; Wu J; He X; Chen G; Brazier JE
    Value Health; 2020 Oct; 23(10):1391-1399. PubMed ID: 33032784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Time trade-off and ranking exercises are sensitive to different dimensions of EQ-5D health states.
    Rand-Hendriksen K; Augestad LA
    Value Health; 2012; 15(5):777-82. PubMed ID: 22867789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Challenges to time trade-off utility assessment methods: when should you consider alternative approaches?
    Boye KS; Matza LS; Feeny DH; Johnston JA; Bowman L; Jordan JB
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2014 Jun; 14(3):437-50. PubMed ID: 24832003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Health State Utilities for Patient's Current Health from Bipolar Type I Disorder.
    Banihashemian M; Rashidian A; Gholamian F; Parsaeian M; Moradi N; Amini H
    J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2018 Mar; 21(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 29643263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.