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 *

195 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25494562)

  • 1. Patients and clinicians as stakeholders in comparative effectiveness research: multiple perspectives and evolving roles.
    Williams SS; Esposito D; Rich EC
    J Comp Eff Res; 2014 Nov; 3(6):573-5. PubMed ID: 25494562
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Stakeholder engagement for comparative effectiveness research in cancer care: experience of the DEcIDE Cancer Consortium.
    Greenberg CC; Wind JK; Chang GJ; Chen RC; Schrag D
    J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Mar; 2(2):117-25. PubMed ID: 24236554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. How best to engage patients, doctors, and other stakeholders in designing comparative effectiveness studies.
    Hoffman A; Montgomery R; Aubry W; Tunis SR
    Health Aff (Millwood); 2010 Oct; 29(10):1834-41. PubMed ID: 20921483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A physician fitness program: enhancing the physician as an "exercise" role model for patients.
    Rogers LQ; Gutin B; Humphries MC; Lemmon CR; Waller JL; Baranowski T; Saunders R
    Teach Learn Med; 2005; 17(1):27-35. PubMed ID: 15691811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Doctors and patients: the role of clinicians in the placebo effect.
    Moerman D
    Adv Mind Body Med; 2003; 19(1):14-22. PubMed ID: 12825409
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rethinking medical decision making. Interview by Mark Hagland.
    Wennberg JE
    Healthplan; 1999; 40(3):44-52. PubMed ID: 10538084
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Attitudes toward comparative effectiveness research and patient engagement among reproductive health clinicians.
    Kohn J; Unger Z; Dolatshahi J; Simons H; Rein A
    J Comp Eff Res; 2017 Jun; 6(4):337-345. PubMed ID: 28621553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A tall order on a tight timeframe: stakeholder perspectives on comparative effectiveness research using electronic clinical data.
    Holve E; Lopez MH; Scott L; Segal C
    J Comp Eff Res; 2012 Sep; 1(5):441-51. PubMed ID: 24236421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. E-patients--revolutionizing the practice of medicine.
    Kurup V
    Int Anesthesiol Clin; 2010; 48(3):123-9. PubMed ID: 20616641
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Provider and patient perspectives regarding health care for war-related health concerns.
    Davis JD; Engel CC; Mishkind M; Jaffer A; Sjoberg T; Tinker T; McGough M; Tipton S; Armstrong D; O'Leary T
    Patient Educ Couns; 2007 Sep; 68(1):52-60. PubMed ID: 17537612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Stakeholder Engagement in a Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measure Implementation: A Report from the SAFTINet Practice-based Research Network (PBRN).
    Kwan BM; Sills MR; Graham D; Hamer MK; Fairclough DL; Hammermeister KE; Kaiser A; de Jesus Diaz-Perez M; Schilling LM
    J Am Board Fam Med; 2016; 29(1):102-15. PubMed ID: 26769882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Empathy in the physician's pain practice: benefits, barriers, and recommendations.
    Banja JD
    Pain Med; 2006; 7(3):265-75. PubMed ID: 16712628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Public perceptions of comparative effectiveness research and use of evidence in healthcare decision-making.
    Cornwell D; Hu M; Esposito D
    J Comp Eff Res; 2014 Nov; 3(6):623-34. PubMed ID: 25494569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Ma'am, Please Tell Me What You Do.
    Maxwell E
    Circulation; 2019 Jan; 139(5):573-574. PubMed ID: 30689423
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in developing a translation table framework for comparative effectiveness research.
    Gliklich RE; Leavy MB; Velentgas P; Dreyer NA; Tunis SR; Mohr P; Messner DA; Moloney RM; Karkare SU; Dubois RW; Graff JS
    J Comp Eff Res; 2012 May; 1(3):281-92. PubMed ID: 24237409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On mentors, epitaphs & patients. What it takes to become a beloved physician.
    Byrum J
    J Ark Med Soc; 1998 May; 94(12):516-9. PubMed ID: 9604582
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in health care decision-making: issues, controversies and moving forward.
    Dirksen CD
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2014 Dec; 14(6):785-94. PubMed ID: 25135194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How do general practitioners work together with other health care providers: policy, reality and research perspectives within the Australian context?
    Naccarella L; Sims J
    J Interprof Care; 2003 Aug; 17(3):303-4. PubMed ID: 12850881
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How I think: perspectives on process, people, politics, and presence.
    Ventres WB
    J Am Board Fam Med; 2012; 25(6):930-6. PubMed ID: 23136336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Patient and clinician support for the learning healthcare system: recommendations for enhancing value.
    Moloney RM; Tambor ES; Tunis SR
    J Comp Eff Res; 2016 Mar; 5(2):123-8. PubMed ID: 26930026
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.