307 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24289488)
1. Mapping the FACT-G cancer-specific quality of life instrument to the EQ-5D and SF-6D.
Teckle P; McTaggart-Cowan H; Van der Hoek K; Chia S; Melosky B; Gelmon K; Peacock S
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2013 Dec; 11():203. PubMed ID: 24289488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mapping QLQ-C30 Onto EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D-V2 in Patients With Colorectal and Breast Cancer From a Developing Country.
Yousefi M; Nahvijou A; Sari AA; Ameri H
Value Health Reg Issues; 2021 May; 24():57-66. PubMed ID: 33508752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale to estimate health state utility values: mapping from the MSIS-29, version 2, to the EQ-5D and the SF-6D.
Hawton A; Green C; Telford C; Zajicek J; Wright D
Value Health; 2012 Dec; 15(8):1084-91. PubMed ID: 23244811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mapping the cancer-specific QLQ-C30 onto the generic EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in colorectal cancer patients.
Ameri H; Yousefi M; Yaseri M; Nahvijou A; Arab M; Akbari Sari A
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2019 Feb; 19(1):89-96. PubMed ID: 30173585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Mapping the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 to the preference-based EQ-5D, SF-6D, and 15D instruments.
Kontodimopoulos N; Aletras VH; Paliouras D; Niakas D
Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1151-7. PubMed ID: 19558372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mapping function from FACT-B to EQ-5D-5 L using multiple modelling approaches: data from breast cancer patients in China.
Yang Q; Yu XX; Zhang W; Li H
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2019 Oct; 17(1):153. PubMed ID: 31615531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Testing alternative regression models to predict utilities: mapping the QLQ-C30 onto the EQ-5D-5L and the SF-6D.
Lamu AN; Olsen JA
Qual Life Res; 2018 Nov; 27(11):2823-2839. PubMed ID: 30173314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mapping the Chinese Version of the EORTC QLQ-BR53 Onto the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D Utility Scores.
Liu T; Li S; Wang M; Sun Q; Chen G
Patient; 2020 Oct; 13(5):537-555. PubMed ID: 32382953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mapping between the Roland Morris Questionnaire and generic preference-based measures.
Khan KA; Madan J; Petrou S; Lamb SE
Value Health; 2014 Sep; 17(6):686-95. PubMed ID: 25236992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mapping the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores to EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D utility scores in patients with schizophrenia.
Abdin E; Chong SA; Seow E; Verma S; Tan KB; Subramaniam M
Qual Life Res; 2019 Jan; 28(1):177-186. PubMed ID: 30382480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mapping of the Gastrointestinal Short Form Questionnaire (GSF-Q) into EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Monroy M; Ruiz MA; Rejas J; Soto J
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2018 Sep; 16(1):177. PubMed ID: 30200982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Development of algorithms to estimate the EQ-5D-5L from the FACT-L in patients with lung cancer: a mapping study.
Jiang L; Zhou H; Yang Q; Luo X; Huang D
Qual Life Res; 2024 Mar; 33(3):805-816. PubMed ID: 38148367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Exploring the validity of estimating EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values from the health assessment questionnaire in patients with inflammatory arthritis.
Harrison MJ; Lunt M; Verstappen SM; Watson KD; Bansback NJ; Symmons DP
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2010 Feb; 8():21. PubMed ID: 20149253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Catalog and comparison of societal preferences (utilities) for lung cancer health states: results from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study.
Tramontano AC; Schrag DL; Malin JK; Miller MC; Weeks JC; Swan JS; McMahon PM
Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):371-87. PubMed ID: 25670839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modelling and survey.
Longworth L; Yang Y; Young T; Mulhern B; Hernández Alava M; Mukuria C; Rowen D; Tosh J; Tsuchiya A; Evans P; Devianee Keetharuth A; Brazier J
Health Technol Assess; 2014 Feb; 18(9):1-224. PubMed ID: 24524660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D Utility Measures in Symptomatic benign Thyroid Nodules: Acceptability and Psychometric Evaluation.
Wong CKH; Lang BHH; Yu HMS; Lam CLK
Patient; 2017 Aug; 10(4):447-454. PubMed ID: 28224296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of the preference-based EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).
Yang F; Lau T; Lee E; Vathsala A; Chia KS; Luo N
Eur J Health Econ; 2015 Dec; 16(9):1019-26. PubMed ID: 25519850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Predicting EQ-5D-US and SF-6D societal health state values from the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire.
McDonough CM; Grove MR; Elledge AD; Tosteson AN
Osteoporos Int; 2012 Feb; 23(2):723-32. PubMed ID: 21484360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A comparison between the EQ-5D and the SF-6D in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Chen J; Wong CK; McGhee SM; Pang PK; Yu WC
PLoS One; 2014; 9(11):e112389. PubMed ID: 25379673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ H&N35 to the EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D for papillary thyroid carcinoma.
Huang D; Zeng D; Tang Y; Jiang L; Yang Q
Qual Life Res; 2024 Feb; 33(2):491-505. PubMed ID: 37938402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
