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: 25128059)

  • 1. A comparison of national guidelines for network meta-analysis.
    Laws A; Kendall R; Hawkins N
    Value Health; 2014 Jul; 17(5):642-54. PubMed ID: 25128059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A Comparison of National Guidelines for Network Meta-Analysis.
    Laws A; Tao R; Wang S; Padhiar A; Goring S
    Value Health; 2019 Oct; 22(10):1178-1186. PubMed ID: 31563261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2.
    Hoaglin DC; Hawkins N; Jansen JP; Scott DA; Itzler R; Cappelleri JC; Boersma C; Thompson D; Larholt KM; Diaz M; Barrett A
    Value Health; 2011 Jun; 14(4):429-37. PubMed ID: 21669367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Network meta-analyses: Interest and limits in oncology].
    Ribassin-Majed L; Pignon JP; Michiels S; Blanchard P
    Bull Cancer; 2016 Mar; 103(3):289-93. PubMed ID: 26917469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 1.
    Jansen JP; Fleurence R; Devine B; Itzler R; Barrett A; Hawkins N; Lee K; Boersma C; Annemans L; Cappelleri JC
    Value Health; 2011 Jun; 14(4):417-28. PubMed ID: 21669366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Extending Treatment Networks in Health Technology Assessment: How Far Should We Go?
    Caldwell DM; Dias S; Welton NJ
    Value Health; 2015 Jul; 18(5):673-81. PubMed ID: 26297096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The ISPOR Good Practices for Quality Improvement of Cost-Effectiveness Research Task Force Report.
    McGhan WF; Al M; Doshi JA; Kamae I; Marx SE; Rindress D
    Value Health; 2009; 12(8):1086-99. PubMed ID: 19744291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A primer on the assessment of medical technologies.
    Matuszewski KA
    Pharm Pract Manag Q; 1997 Jan; 16(4):53-65. PubMed ID: 10164160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Visualizing the flow of evidence in network meta-analysis and characterizing mixed treatment comparisons.
    König J; Krahn U; Binder H
    Stat Med; 2013 Dec; 32(30):5414-29. PubMed ID: 24123165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Conscious sedation guidance.
    Coulthard P
    Evid Based Dent; 2006; 7(4):90-1. PubMed ID: 17187034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative effectiveness of antibiotics for uncomplicated urinary tract infections: network meta-analysis of randomized trials.
    Knottnerus BJ; Grigoryan L; Geerlings SE; Moll van Charante EP; Verheij TJ; Kessels AG; ter Riet G
    Fam Pract; 2012 Dec; 29(6):659-70. PubMed ID: 22516128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Relative effectiveness assessment of listed drugs (REAL): a new method for an early comparison of the effectiveness of approved health technologies.
    Falissard B; Izard V; Xerri B; Bouvenot G; Meyer F; Degos L
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2010 Jan; 26(1):124-30. PubMed ID: 20059790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses.
    Song F; Altman DG; Glenny AM; Deeks JJ
    BMJ; 2003 Mar; 326(7387):472. PubMed ID: 12609941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. [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]  

  • 18. Methods for Population-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons in Health Technology Appraisal.
    Phillippo DM; Ades AE; Dias S; Palmer S; Abrams KR; Welton NJ
    Med Decis Making; 2018 Feb; 38(2):200-211. PubMed ID: 28823204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Some methodological points to consider when performing systematic reviews in comparative effectiveness research.
    Berlin JA; Cepeda MS
    Clin Trials; 2012 Feb; 9(1):27-34. PubMed ID: 22049086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force.
    Sullivan SD; Mauskopf JA; Augustovski F; Jaime Caro J; Lee KM; Minchin M; Orlewska E; Penna P; Rodriguez Barrios JM; Shau WY
    Value Health; 2014; 17(1):5-14. PubMed ID: 24438712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.