121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25663152)
1. How Well Do the Generic Multi-attribute Utility Instruments Incorporate Patient and Public Views Into Their Descriptive Systems?
Stevens KJ
Patient; 2016 Feb; 9(1):5-13. PubMed ID: 25663152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health.
Griebsch I; Coast J; Brown J
Pediatrics; 2005 May; 115(5):e600-14. PubMed ID: 15867026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Can multi-attribute utility instruments adequately account for subjective well-being?
Richardson J; Chen G; Khan MA; Iezzi A
Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):292-304. PubMed ID: 25623064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments for Paediatric Populations.
Chen G; Ratcliffe J
Pharmacoeconomics; 2015 Oct; 33(10):1013-28. PubMed ID: 25985933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Measuring the Sensitivity and Construct Validity of 6 Utility Instruments in 7 Disease Areas.
Richardson J; Iezzi A; Khan MA; Chen G; Maxwell A
Med Decis Making; 2016 Feb; 36(2):147-59. PubMed ID: 26582319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The use of QALY weights for QALY calculations: a review of industry submissions requesting listing on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 2002-4.
Scuffham PA; Whitty JA; Mitchell A; Viney R
Pharmacoeconomics; 2008; 26(4):297-310. PubMed ID: 18370565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing outcomes for cost-utility analysis in depression: comparison of five multi-attribute utility instruments with two depression-specific outcome measures.
Mihalopoulos C; Chen G; Iezzi A; Khan MA; Richardson J
Br J Psychiatry; 2014 Nov; 205(5):390-7. PubMed ID: 25257063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Using qualitative methods to inform the trade-off between content validity and consistency in utility assessment: the example of type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer's disease.
McGrath C; Rofail D; Gargon E; Abetz L
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2010 Feb; 8():23. PubMed ID: 20152041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Systematic Review of the Literature on the Development of Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures of Health.
Goodwin E; Green C
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2016 Apr; 14(2):161-83. PubMed ID: 26818198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency.
Richardson G; Manca A
Health Econ; 2004 Dec; 13(12):1203-10. PubMed ID: 15386669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A Head-to-Head Comparison of the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments in Patients Who Have Previously Undergone Bariatric Surgery.
Campbell JA; Palmer AJ; Venn A; Sharman M; Otahal P; Neil A
Patient; 2016 Aug; 9(4):311-22. PubMed ID: 26841910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Outcome measurement in economic evaluation.
Johannesson M; Jönsson B; Karlsson G
Health Econ; 1996; 5(4):279-96. PubMed ID: 8880165
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost-effectiveness analysis in severe mental illness: outcome measures selection.
Stant AD; Buskens E; Jenner JA; Wiersma D; TenVergert EM
J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2007 Jun; 10(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 17603150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: who should value health?
Stamuli E
Br Med Bull; 2011; 97():197-210. PubMed ID: 21285110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Health economic studies: an introduction to cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses.
Angevine PD; Berven S
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2014 Oct; 39(22 Suppl 1):S9-15. PubMed ID: 25299265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Incorporating feelings related to the uncertainty about future health in utility measurement.
Gandjour A
Health Econ; 2008 Oct; 17(10):1207-13. PubMed ID: 18074407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Strategic Planning in Population Health and Public Health Practice: A Call to Action for Higher Education.
Phelps C; Madhavan G; Rappuoli R; Levin S; Shortliffe E; Colwell R
Milbank Q; 2016 Mar; 94(1):109-25. PubMed ID: 26994711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: results across five trial-based cost-utility studies.
Joore M; Brunenberg D; Nelemans P; Wouters E; Kuijpers P; Honig A; Willems D; de Leeuw P; Severens J; Boonen A
Value Health; 2010; 13(2):222-9. PubMed ID: 19878492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Societal Preferences for Interventions with the Same Efficiency: Assessment and Application to Decision Making.
Shiroiwa T; Saito S; Shimozuma K; Kodama S; Noto S; Fukuda T
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2016 Jun; 14(3):375-85. PubMed ID: 26940671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Outcomes of social care for adults: developing a preference-weighted measure.
Netten A; Burge P; Malley J; Potoglou D; Towers AM; Brazier J; Flynn T; Forder J; Wall B
Health Technol Assess; 2012; 16(16):1-166. PubMed ID: 22459668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
