216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25494569)
21. A conceptual model of the multiple stages of communication necessary to support patient-centered care.
Halley MC; Rendle KA; Frosch DL
J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Jul; 2(4):421-33. PubMed ID: 24236683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Evaluation of Pharmacy and Therapeutic (P&T) Committee member knowledge, attitudes and ability regarding the use of comparative effectiveness research (CER) in health care decision-making.
Tang DH; Warholak TL; Hines LE; Hurwitz J; Brown M; Taylor AM; Brixner D; Malone DC
Res Social Adm Pharm; 2014; 10(5):768-80. PubMed ID: 24480384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A flexible approach to evidentiary standards for comparative effectiveness research.
Garrison LP; Neumann PJ; Radensky P; Walcoff SD
Health Aff (Millwood); 2010 Oct; 29(10):1812-7. PubMed ID: 20921480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. What do providers, payers and patients need from comparative effectiveness research on diagnostics? The case of HER2/Neu testing in breast cancer.
Trosman JR; Weldon CB; Schink JC; Gradishar WJ; Benson AB
J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Jul; 2(4):461-77. PubMed ID: 24236686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Investigation of comparative effectiveness research in Asia, Europe, and North America.
Patel I; Rarus R; Tan X; Lee EK; Guy J; Ahmad A; Chang J
Indian J Pharmacol; 2015; 47(6):585-93. PubMed ID: 26729947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Health care decision makers' use of comparative effectiveness research: report from a series of focus groups.
Villa L; Warholak TL; Hines LE; Taylor AM; Brown M; Hurwitz J; Brixner D; Malone DC
J Manag Care Pharm; 2013; 19(9):745-54. PubMed ID: 24156643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effectiveness of public deliberation methods for gathering input on issues in healthcare: Results from a randomized trial.
Carman KL; Mallery C; Maurer M; Wang G; Garfinkel S; Yang M; Gilmore D; Windham A; Ginsburg M; Sofaer S; Gold M; Pathak-Sen E; Davies T; Siegel J; Mangrum R; Fernandez J; Richmond J; Fishkin J; Siu Chao A
Soc Sci Med; 2015 May; 133():11-20. PubMed ID: 25828260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. Comparative effectiveness research priorities: identifying critical gaps in evidence for clinical and health policy decision making.
Chalkidou K; Whicher D; Kary W; Tunis S
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 19619341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Attitudes and views of the general public towards research participation.
Burns KE; Magyarody N; Jiang D; Wald R
Intern Med J; 2013 May; 43(5):531-40. PubMed ID: 21241441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Doctor knows best: physician endorsements, public opinion, and the politics of comparative effectiveness research.
Gerber AS; Patashnik EM; Doherty D; Dowling CM
J Health Polit Policy Law; 2014 Feb; 39(1):171-208. PubMed ID: 24193608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Closing the information gap: informing better medical decisionmaking through the use of post-market safety and comparative effectiveness information.
Fox B
Food Drug Law J; 2012; 67(1):83-101, iii. PubMed ID: 24624650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Maximizing the clinical utility of comparative effectiveness research.
Umscheid CA
Clin Pharmacol Ther; 2010 Dec; 88(6):876-9. PubMed ID: 20962776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparative effectiveness research: Policy context, methods development and research infrastructure.
Tunis SR; Benner J; McClellan M
Stat Med; 2010 Aug; 29(19):1963-76. PubMed ID: 20564311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. PAYER PERSPECTIVES ON FUTURE ACCEPTABILITY OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS AND RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH.
Moloney R; Mohr P; Hawe E; Shah K; Garau M; Towse A
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(1-2):90-8. PubMed ID: 26168804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Public attitudes regarding willingness to participate in medical research studies.
Trauth JM; Musa D; Siminoff L; Jewell IK; Ricci E
J Health Soc Policy; 2000; 12(2):23-43. PubMed ID: 11184441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Unresolved tensions in consumer engagement in CER: a US research perspective.
Workman T; Maurer M; Carman K
J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Mar; 2(2):127-34. PubMed ID: 24236555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Methodological challenges of comparative effectiveness research in pain: implications for investigators, clinicians, and policy makers.
Bellows BK; Biskupiak J
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother; 2011; 25(3):267-74. PubMed ID: 21882980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Shared decision-making and comparative effectiveness research for patients with chronic conditions: an urgent synergy for better health.
Gionfriddo MR; Leppin AL; Brito JP; Leblanc A; Shah ND; Montori VM
J Comp Eff Res; 2013 Nov; 2(6):595-603. PubMed ID: 24236798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
