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.
285 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25559762)
1. Developing a patient-directed policy framework for managing orphan and ultra-orphan drugs throughout their lifecycle. Menon D; Stafinski T; Dunn A; Wong-Rieger D Patient; 2015 Feb; 8(1):103-17. PubMed ID: 25559762 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Involving patients in reducing decision uncertainties around orphan and ultra-orphan drugs: a rare opportunity? Menon D; Stafinski T; Dunn A; Short H Patient; 2015 Feb; 8(1):29-39. PubMed ID: 25516506 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Exploring patient and family involvement in the lifecycle of an orphan drug: a scoping review. Young A; Menon D; Street J; Al-Hertani W; Stafinski T Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2017 Dec; 12(1):188. PubMed ID: 29273068 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Why orphan drug coverage reimbursement decision-making needs patient and public involvement. Douglas CM; Wilcox E; Burgess M; Lynd LD Health Policy; 2015 May; 119(5):588-96. PubMed ID: 25641123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks. Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Engagement of Canadian Patients with Rare Diseases and Their Families in the Lifecycle of Therapy: A Qualitative Study. Young A; Menon D; Street J; Al-Hertani W; Stafinski T Patient; 2018 Jun; 11(3):353-359. PubMed ID: 29299833 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A checklist for managed access programmes for reimbursement co-designed by Canadian patients and caregivers. Young A; Menon D; Street J; Al-Hertani W; Stafinski T Health Expect; 2018 Dec; 21(6):973-980. PubMed ID: 29624799 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The use of a policy dialogue to facilitate evidence-informed policy development for improved access to care: the case of the Winnipeg Central Intake Service (WCIS). Damani Z; MacKean G; Bohm E; DeMone B; Wright B; Noseworthy T; Holroyd-Leduc J; Marshall DA Health Res Policy Syst; 2016 Oct; 14(1):78. PubMed ID: 27756401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The quality of economic evaluations of ultra-orphan drugs in Europe - a systematic review. Schuller Y; Hollak CE; Biegstraaten M Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2015 Jul; 10():92. PubMed ID: 26223689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four European countries. Nicod E Eur J Health Econ; 2017 Jul; 18(6):715-730. PubMed ID: 27538758 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. When everyone is an orphan: against adopting a U.S.-styled orphan drug policy in Canada. Herder M Account Res; 2013; 20(4):227-69. PubMed ID: 23805831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Value-based reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs: a scoping review and decision framework. Paulden M; Stafinski T; Menon D; McCabe C Pharmacoeconomics; 2015 Mar; 33(3):255-69. PubMed ID: 25412735 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Patient organization involvement and the challenge of securing access to treatments for rare diseases: report of a policy engagement workshop. Mikami K; Sturdy S Res Involv Engagem; 2017; 3():14. PubMed ID: 29062539 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Meeting the affordability challenges posed by orphan drugs: a survey of payers, providers, and employers. Lopata E; Terrone C; Gopalan A; Ladikos N; Richardson T J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2021 Jun; 27(6):706-713. PubMed ID: 33586514 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Priority setting for orphan drugs: an international comparison. Rosenberg-Yunger ZR; Daar AS; Thorsteinsdóttir H; Martin DK Health Policy; 2011 Apr; 100(1):25-34. PubMed ID: 20961647 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Developing interdisciplinary maternity services policy in Canada. Evaluation of a consensus workshop. Martin CM; Kasperski J J Eval Clin Pract; 2010 Feb; 16(1):238-45. PubMed ID: 20367842 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Regulatory Decision Making in Canada-Exploring New Frontiers in Patient Involvement. Klein AV; Hardy S; Lim R; Marshall DA Value Health; 2016; 19(6):730-733. PubMed ID: 27712698 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. DRUG EVALUATION AND DECISION MAKING IN CATALONIA: DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK BASED ON MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS (MCDA) FOR ORPHAN DRUGS. Gilabert-Perramon A; Torrent-Farnell J; Catalan A; Prat A; Fontanet M; Puig-Peiró R; Merino-Montero S; Khoury H; Goetghebeur MM; Badia X Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(1):111-120. PubMed ID: 28434413 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Access to orphan drugs in western Europe: can more systematic policymaking really help to avoid different decisions about the same drug? Kanters TA; Hakkaart L; Rutten-van Mölken MP; Redekop WK Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 15(4):557-9. PubMed ID: 25973903 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]