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.
193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27068692)
1. A model for priority setting of health technology assessment: the experience of AHP-TOPSIS combination approach. Mobinizadeh M; Raeissi P; Nasiripour AA; Olyaeemanesh A; Tabibi SJ Daru; 2016 Apr; 24():10. PubMed ID: 27068692 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The health systems' priority setting criteria for selecting health technologies: A systematic review of the current evidence. Mobinizadeh M; Raeissi P; Nasiripour AA; Olyaeemanesh A; Tabibi SJ Med J Islam Repub Iran; 2016; 30():329. PubMed ID: 27390699 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Topic selection for health technology assessment: An approach combining multiple attribute decision making and decision rules. Mobinizadeh M; Mohamadi E; Arman H; Nasiripour A; Olyaeemanesh A; Mohamadi S Med J Islam Repub Iran; 2021; 35():40. PubMed ID: 34211942 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. A Novel Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Building Material Supplier Selection Based on Entropy-AHP Weighted TOPSIS. Chen CH Entropy (Basel); 2020 Feb; 22(2):. PubMed ID: 33286032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A modified TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) applied to choosing appropriate selection methods in ongoing surveillance for Avian Influenza in Canada. El Allaki F; Christensen J; Vallières A Prev Vet Med; 2019 Apr; 165():36-43. PubMed ID: 30851926 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Developing a decision support system to link health technology assessment (HTA) reports to the health system policies in Iran. Yazdani S; Jadidfard MP Health Policy Plan; 2017 May; 32(4):504-515. PubMed ID: 28025325 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Determination of the most appropriate fertilizing method for apple trees using multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches. Heidarisoltanabadi M; Elhami B; Imanmehr A; Khadivi A Food Sci Nutr; 2024 Feb; 12(2):1158-1169. PubMed ID: 38370082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An application of multi-criteria decision-making approach to sustainable drug shortages management: evidence from a developing country. Moosivand A; Rangchian M; Zarei L; Peiravian F; Mehralian G; Sharifnia H J Pharm Health Care Sci; 2021 Apr; 7(1):14. PubMed ID: 33795021 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Prioritization of water erosion-prone sub-watersheds using three ensemble methods in Qareaghaj catchment, southern Iran. Pourghasemi HR; Honarmandnejad F; Rezaei M; Tarazkar MH; Sadhasivam N Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2021 Jul; 28(28):37894-37917. PubMed ID: 33723776 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bottled water quality ranking via the multiple-criteria decision-making process: a case study of two-stage fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS. Nabizadeh R; Yousefzadeh S; Yaghmaeian K; Alimohammadi M; Mokhtari Z Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2022 Mar; 29(14):20437-20448. PubMed ID: 34735703 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A New Decision Model Approach for Health Technology Assessment and A Case Study for Dialysis Alternatives in Turkey. Öztürk N; Tozan H; Vayvay Ö Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 May; 17(10):. PubMed ID: 32455609 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Social values and health priority setting in Australia: an analysis applied to the context of health technology assessment. Whitty JA; Littlejohns P Health Policy; 2015 Feb; 119(2):127-36. PubMed ID: 25267072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH. Husereau D; Boucher M; Noorani H Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2010 Jul; 26(3):341-7. PubMed ID: 20584365 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Determining Criteria and Weights for Prioritizing Health Technologies Based on the Preferences of the General Population: A New Zealand Pilot Study. Sullivan T; Hansen P Value Health; 2017 Apr; 20(4):679-686. PubMed ID: 28408011 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Setting priorities for the adoption of health technologies on a national level -- the Israeli experience. Shani S; Siebzehner MI; Luxenburg O; Shemer J Health Policy; 2000 Dec; 54(3):169-85. PubMed ID: 11154787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The use of multi-criteria decision making models in evaluating anesthesia method options in circumcision surgery. Hancerliogullari G; Hancerliogullari KO; Koksalmis E BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2017 Jan; 17(1):14. PubMed ID: 28114944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Health-Care Waste Treatment Technology Selection Using the Interval 2-Tuple Induced TOPSIS Method. Lu C; You JX; Liu HC; Li P Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2016 Jun; 13(6):. PubMed ID: 27271652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A novel hybrid MCDM model for performance evaluation of research and technology organizations based on BSC approach. Varmazyar M; Dehghanbaghi M; Afkhami M Eval Program Plann; 2016 Oct; 58():125-140. PubMed ID: 27371786 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A model for HTA priority setting: experience in Lithuania. Jankauskiene D; Petronyte G Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Oct; 29(4):450-5. PubMed ID: 24290339 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Priority setting for the health technology assessment]. Poblete-Vargas S; Castillo-Laborde C Rev Med Chil; 2014 Jan; 142 Suppl 1():S22-6. PubMed ID: 24861176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]