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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23401993)

  • 1. [Pragmatic randomized controlled trials as a source of data in the assessment of effectiveness of medical technology].
    Kaczyński L; Solnica B
    Przegl Lek; 2012; 69(9):703-7. PubMed ID: 23401993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity.
    Godwin M; Ruhland L; Casson I; MacDonald S; Delva D; Birtwhistle R; Lam M; Seguin R
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2003 Dec; 3():28. PubMed ID: 14690550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The role for pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) in comparative effectiveness research.
    Chalkidou K; Tunis S; Whicher D; Fowler R; Zwarenstein M
    Clin Trials; 2012 Aug; 9(4):436-46. PubMed ID: 22752634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Circular instead of hierarchical: methodological principles for the evaluation of complex interventions.
    Walach H; Falkenberg T; Fønnebø V; Lewith G; Jonas WB
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Jun; 6():29. PubMed ID: 16796762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Ultrasound technology: the RADIUS (Routine Antenatal Diagnostic Imaging with Ultrasound) study & national policy.
    Huang L
    J Clin Eng; 1994; 19(4):297-309. PubMed ID: 10137111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care.
    Sheldon TA
    Health Econ; 1996; 5(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 8653188
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management: part 6. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.
    Manchikanti L; Datta S; Smith HS; Hirsch JA
    Pain Physician; 2009; 12(5):819-50. PubMed ID: 19787009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Health technology assessment for medical devices in Europe. What must be considered.
    Siebert M; Clauss LC; Carlisle M; Casteels B; de Jong P; Kreuzer M; Sanghera S; Stokoe G; Trueman P; Lang AW;
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2002; 18(3):733-40. PubMed ID: 12391964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Some alternative perspectives concerning medical technology assessment.
    Diamond GA
    J Invasive Cardiol; 1992; 4(1):39-44. PubMed ID: 10149903
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
    Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A
    Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Health technology assessment.
    Hailey D
    Singapore Med J; 2006 Mar; 47(3):187-92; quiz 193. PubMed ID: 16518551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Policy making and roles of health technology assessment.
    Tantivess S
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2008 Jun; 91 Suppl 2():S88-99. PubMed ID: 19253491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Health technology assessment.
    Papatheofanis FJ
    Q J Nucl Med; 2000 Jun; 44(2):105-11. PubMed ID: 10967621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Study design: statistical and methodologic considerations.
    Rubenfeld GD
    Respir Care; 1995 Sep; 40(9):980-6. PubMed ID: 10152244
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Experiences with and impact of health technology assessment on the German Standing Committee of physicians and patients].
    Gibis B; Rheinberger P
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2002 Feb; 96(2):82-90. PubMed ID: 11921610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project: a model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of clinical pathways.
    Gooch KL; Smith D; Wasylak T; Faris PD; Marshall DA; Khong H; Hibbert JE; Parker RD; Zernicke RF; Beaupre L; Pearce T; Johnston DW; Frank CB
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):113-23. PubMed ID: 19366494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: structures, methodologies, and tools developed by the European Network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA.
    Kristensen FB; Lampe K; Chase DL; Lee-Robin SH; Wild C; Moharra M; Garrido MV; Nielsen CP; Røttingen JA; Neikter SA; Bistrup ML;
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Dec; 25 Suppl 2():1-8. PubMed ID: 20030885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Control of bias in randomized controlled trials published in prosthodontic journals.
    Dumbrigue HB; Jones JS; Esquivel JF
    J Prosthet Dent; 2001 Dec; 86(6):592-6. PubMed ID: 11753309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. ['Medical technology assessment'; more than just efficacy].
    Buskens E
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Mar; 144(13):622-6. PubMed ID: 10761552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Quality assessment of randomized controlled trials of oral implants.
    Esposito M; Coulthard P; Worthington HV; Jokstad A
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2001; 16(6):783-92. PubMed ID: 11769828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.