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.
249 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23863188)
1. Assessing the impacts of citizen deliberations on the health technology process. Abelson J; Bombard Y; Gauvin FP; Simeonov D; Boesveld S Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Jul; 29(3):282-9. PubMed ID: 23863188 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach. Bombard Y; Abelson J; Simeonov D; Gauvin FP Soc Sci Med; 2011 Jul; 73(1):135-44. PubMed ID: 21664018 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Access to novel drugs and therapeutics for children and youth: Eliciting citizens' values to inform public funding decisions. Gauvreau CL; Wight L; Subasri M; Palmer A; Hayeems R; Croker A; Abelson J; Fraser B; Bombard Y; Moore Hepburn C; Wilson MG; Denburg A Health Expect; 2023 Apr; 26(2):715-727. PubMed ID: 36639959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Engaging the public in priority-setting for health technology assessment: findings from a citizens' jury. Menon D; Stafinski T Health Expect; 2008 Sep; 11(3):282-93. PubMed ID: 18816324 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review. Street J; Duszynski K; Krawczyk S; Braunack-Mayer A Soc Sci Med; 2014 May; 109():1-9. PubMed ID: 24657639 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Social values and health priority setting in Australia: an analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment. Whitty JA; Littlejohns P Health Policy; 2015 Feb; 119(2):127-36. PubMed ID: 25267072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing the impact of deliberative processes on the views of participants: is it 'in one ear and out the other'? Stafinski T; Menon D; Yasui Y Health Expect; 2014 Apr; 17(2):278-90. PubMed ID: 22296492 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Do consumer voices in health-care citizens' juries matter? Krinks R; Kendall E; Whitty JA; Scuffham PA Health Expect; 2016 Oct; 19(5):1015-22. PubMed ID: 26414486 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Citizens' participation in the Italian health-care system: the experience of the Mixed Advisory Committees. Serapioni M; Duxbury N Health Expect; 2014 Aug; 17(4):488-99. PubMed ID: 22512734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An international survey of the public engagement practices of health technology assessment organizations. Whitty JA Value Health; 2013; 16(1):155-63. PubMed ID: 23337227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. FRAMEWORK FOR USER INVOLVEMENT IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL: VIEWS OF HEALTH MANAGERS, USER REPRESENTATIVES, AND CLINICIANS. Gagnon MP; Desmartis M; Gagnon J; St-Pierre M; Rhainds M; Coulombe M; Tantchou MD; Légaré F Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(1-2):68-77. PubMed ID: 25952585 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Does the community want devolved authority? Results of deliberative polling in Ontario. Abelson J; Lomas J; Eyles J; Birch S; Veenstra G CMAJ; 1995 Aug; 153(4):403-12. PubMed ID: 7634217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A research roadmap for complementary and alternative medicine - what we need to know by 2020. Fischer F; Lewith G; Witt CM; Linde K; von Ammon K; Cardini F; Falkenberg T; Fønnebø V; Johannessen H; Reiter B; Uehleke B; Weidenhammer W; Brinkhaus B Forsch Komplementmed; 2014; 21(2):e1-16. PubMed ID: 24851850 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Strengthening international patient advocacy perspectives on patient involvement in HTA within the HTAi Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group - Commentary. Wale JL; Scott AM; Bertelsen N; Meade N; Res Involv Engagem; 2017; 3():3. PubMed ID: 29062528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Establishing a comprehensive continuum from an evidentiary base to policy development for health technologies: the Ontario experience. Levin L; Goeree R; Sikich N; Jorgensen B; Brouwers MC; Easty T; Zahn C Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(3):299-309. PubMed ID: 17579931 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. From passive subject to active agent: the potential of Citizens' Juries for nursing research. Iredale R; Longley M Nurse Educ Today; 2007 Oct; 27(7):788-95. PubMed ID: 17157967 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AT NATIONAL LEVEL: A STUDY FROM IRAN. Yazdizadeh B; Shahmoradi S; Majdzadeh R; Doaee S; Bazyar M; Souresrafil A; Olyaeemanesh A Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2016 Jan; 32(3):181-9. PubMed ID: 27524462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Health technology assessment: a comprehensive framework for evidence-based recommendations in Ontario. Johnson AP; Sikich NJ; Evans G; Evans W; Giacomini M; Glendining M; Krahn M; Levin L; Oh P; Perera C Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):141-50. PubMed ID: 19366496 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Citizens' Jury and Elder Care: Public Participation and Deliberation in Long-Term Care Policy in Thailand. Chuengsatiansup K; Tengrang K; Posayanonda T; Sihapark S J Aging Soc Policy; 2019; 31(4):378-392. PubMed ID: 29452043 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]