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 *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23224226)

  • 1. Maximal endurable time states and the standard gamble: more preference reversals.
    Stalmeier PF; Verheijen AL
    Eur J Health Econ; 2013 Dec; 14(6):971-7. PubMed ID: 23224226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Testing Nonmonotonicity in Health Preferences.
    Abellan-Perpiñan JM; Martinez-Perez JE; Pinto-Prades JL; Sanchez-Martinez FI
    Med Decis Making; 2024 Jan; 44(1):42-52. PubMed ID: 37947086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Impact of caregiver and parenting status on time trade-off and standard gamble utility scores for health state descriptions.
    Matza LS; Boye KS; Feeny DH; Johnston JA; Bowman L; Jordan JB
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2014 Apr; 12():48. PubMed ID: 24716709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of respondent acceptability for preference measures in stuttering.
    Franic DM; Bothe AK; Bramlett RE
    J Commun Disord; 2012; 45(5):378-89. PubMed ID: 22682377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Reducing preference reversals: The role of preference imprecision and nontransparent methods.
    Pinto-Prades JL; Sánchez-Martínez FI; Abellán-Perpiñán JM; Martínez-Pérez JE
    Health Econ; 2018 Aug; 27(8):1230-1246. PubMed ID: 29770524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validity, feasibility and acceptability of time trade-off and standard gamble assessments in health valuation studies: a study in a multiethnic Asian population in Singapore.
    Wee HL; Li SC; Xie F; Zhang XH; Luo N; Feeny D; Cheung YB; Machin D; Fong KY; Thumboo J
    Value Health; 2008 Mar; 11 Suppl 1():S3-10. PubMed ID: 18387064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. On the assessment of preferences for health and duration: maximal endurable time and better than dead preferences.
    Stalmeier PF; Lamers LM; Busschbach JJ; Krabbe PF
    Med Care; 2007 Sep; 45(9):835-41. PubMed ID: 17712253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Feasibility, comparability, and reliability of the standard gamble compared with the rating scale and time trade-off techniques in Korean population.
    Kim SH; Lee SI; Jo MW
    Qual Life Res; 2017 Dec; 26(12):3387-3397. PubMed ID: 28801862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Examination of assumptions in using time tradeoff and standard gamble utilities in individuals with spinal cord injury.
    Lin MR; Yu WY; Wang SC
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2012 Feb; 93(2):245-52. PubMed ID: 22289233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. QALYs without bias? Nonparametric correction of time trade-off and standard gamble weights based on prospect theory.
    Lipman SA; Brouwer WBF; Attema AE
    Health Econ; 2019 Jul; 28(7):843-854. PubMed ID: 31237093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The standard gamble showed better construct validity than the time trade-off.
    Puhan MA; Schünemann HJ; Wong E; Griffith L; Guyatt GH
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2007 Oct; 60(10):1029-33. PubMed ID: 17884597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Chained time trade-off and standard gamble methods. Applications in oesophageal cancer.
    McNamee P; Glendinning S; Shenfine J; Steen N; Griffin SM; Bond J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2004 Feb; 5(1):81-6. PubMed ID: 15452769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The utility assessment method order influences measurement of parents' risk attitude.
    Finnell SM; Carroll AE; Downs SM
    Value Health; 2012; 15(6):926-32. PubMed ID: 22999143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities.
    Bleichrodt H
    Health Econ; 2002 Jul; 11(5):447-56. PubMed ID: 12112493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. What utility scores do mental health service users, healthcare professionals and members of the general public attribute to different health states? A co-produced mixed methods online survey.
    Flood C; Barlow S; Simpson A; Burls A; Price A; Cartwright M; Brini S;
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(10):e0205223. PubMed ID: 30352071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Rating scale, standard gamble, and time trade-off for people with traumatic spinal cord injuries.
    Lin MR; Hwang HF; Chung KP; Huang C; Chen CY
    Phys Ther; 2006 Mar; 86(3):337-44. PubMed ID: 16506870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A novel approach for health state valuation: Multiple bounded dichotomous choice compared to the traditional standard gamble.
    Poder TG; Ameri H
    Soc Sci Med; 2024 Sep; 357():117173. PubMed ID: 39116700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cognitive impairment and preferences for current health.
    King JT; Tsevat J; Roberts MS
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2009 Jan; 7():1. PubMed ID: 19134191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The validity of time trade-off values in calculating QALYs: constant proportional time trade-off versus the proportional heuristic.
    Dolan P; Stalmeier P
    J Health Econ; 2003 May; 22(3):445-58. PubMed ID: 12683961
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.