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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22380875)

  • 1. The evaluation of lifestyle interventions in the Netherlands.
    Rappange DR; Brouwer WB
    Health Econ Policy Law; 2012 Apr; 7(2):243-61. PubMed ID: 22380875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reflecting on 'The evaluation of lifestyle interventions in the Netherlands'.
    Helderman JK
    Health Econ Policy Law; 2015 Oct; 10(4):461-5. PubMed ID: 25881667
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Rationing health care by thresholds for clinical benefit and its acceptance by the German population].
    Schöne-Seifert B; Friedrich DR; Diederich A
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2012; 106(6):426-34. PubMed ID: 22857730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Economic evaluation in support of national health policy: the case of The Netherlands.
    Elsinga E; Rutten FF
    Soc Sci Med; 1997 Aug; 45(4):605-20. PubMed ID: 9226785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Health economic evaluations in reimbursement decision making in the Netherlands: time to take it seriously?
    Franken M; Koopmanschap M; Steenhoek A
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2014; 108(7):383-9. PubMed ID: 25444296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Problematic notions in Dutch health care package decisions.
    Hoedemaekers R; Oortwijn W
    Health Care Anal; 2003 Dec; 11(4):287-94. PubMed ID: 14769010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Choices in health care: a contribution from The Netherlands.
    van de Ven WP
    Br Med Bull; 1995 Oct; 51(4):781-90. PubMed ID: 8556287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Health Council recommendation on the 'Contours of the basic package'].
    ten Velden GH; Mackenbach JP
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2004 Jan; 148(2):97-101. PubMed ID: 14753133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Aspects of health economic evaluations as a contribution to the priority-setting debate in Germany].
    Brüggenjürgen B
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2010 Sep; 53(9):890-5. PubMed ID: 20853085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Decision-analytical modelling of costs per QALY in the context of the German Social Law].
    Rogowski WH; Landauer M; John J
    Gesundheitswesen; 2009 Nov; 71(11):739-50. PubMed ID: 19551622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. What kind of health economics do we need?
    Lhachimi SK; Ostermann H
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2016; 110-111():18-20. PubMed ID: 26875030
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Can economic evaluation guidelines improve efficiency in resource allocation? The cases of Portugal, The Netherlands, Finland, and the United Kingdom.
    Kanavos P; Trueman P; Bosilevac A
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(4):1179-92. PubMed ID: 11155837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Increasing the Legitimacy of Tough Choices in Healthcare Reimbursement: Approach and Results of a Citizen Forum in The Netherlands.
    Bijlmakers L; Jansen M; Boer B; van Dijk W; Groenewoud S; Zwaap J; Helderman JK; van Exel J; Baltussen R
    Value Health; 2020 Jan; 23(1):32-38. PubMed ID: 31952671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Critical reflections on the prioritisation debate: are we setting the right priorities to address our prioritisation challenges?].
    Penner A
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2012; 106(6):397-403. PubMed ID: 22857725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Democratic institutional design in health care priority setting and rationing].
    Landwehr C
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2012; 106(6):407-11. PubMed ID: 22857727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Significance of selected preventive, therapeutic and rehabilitation services reflected in a population survey].
    Westphal R; Röstermundt A; Raspe H
    Gesundheitswesen; 2001 May; 63(5):302-10. PubMed ID: 11441673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [On the overestimation of the benefit of prevention].
    Mühlhauser I
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2014; 108(4):208-18. PubMed ID: 24889710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Decision support through economic evaluation from the perspective of science in Germany].
    Graf von der Schulenburg JM
    Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz; 2012 May; 55(5):660-7. PubMed ID: 22526854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparative analysis of decision maker preferences for equity/efficiency attributes in reimbursement decisions in three European countries.
    Baji P; García-Goñi M; Gulácsi L; Mentzakis E; Paolucci F
    Eur J Health Econ; 2016 Sep; 17(7):791-9. PubMed ID: 26296623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.