170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28366905)
1. Public Reasoning and Health-Care Priority Setting: The Case of NICE.
Rumbold B; Weale A; Rid A; Wilson J; Littlejohns P
Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2017; 27(1):107-134. PubMed ID: 28366905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. NICE and Fair? Health Technology Assessment Policy Under the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 1999-2018.
Charlton V
Health Care Anal; 2020 Sep; 28(3):193-227. PubMed ID: 31325000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Justice, Transparency and the Guiding Principles of the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
Charlton V
Health Care Anal; 2022 Jun; 30(2):115-145. PubMed ID: 34750743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Does NICE apply the rule of rescue in its approach to highly specialised technologies?
Charlton V
J Med Ethics; 2022 Feb; 48(2):118-125. PubMed ID: 33685978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An empirical ethics study of the coherence of NICE technology appraisal policy and its implications for moral justification.
Charlton V; DiStefano M
BMC Med Ethics; 2024 Mar; 25(1):28. PubMed ID: 38448909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Exorcising the positivist ghost in the priority-setting machine: NICE and the demise of the 'social value judgement'.
Charlton V; Weale A
Health Econ Policy Law; 2021 Oct; 16(4):505-511. PubMed ID: 33568251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Innovation as a value in healthcare priority-setting: the UK experience.
Charlton V; Rid A
Soc Justice Res; 2019; 32(2):208-238. PubMed ID: 31281204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The use of cost-effectiveness by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): no(t yet an) exemplar of a deliberative process.
Schlander M
J Med Ethics; 2008 Jul; 34(7):534-9. PubMed ID: 18591289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Some inconsistencies in NICE's consideration of social values.
Paulden M; O'Mahony JF; Culyer AJ; McCabe C
Pharmacoeconomics; 2014 Nov; 32(11):1043-53. PubMed ID: 25145802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The normative grounds for NICE decision-making: a narrative cross-disciplinary review of empirical studies.
Charlton V
Health Econ Policy Law; 2022 Oct; 17(4):444-470. PubMed ID: 35293306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. NICE's social value judgements about equity in health and health care.
Shah KK; Cookson R; Culyer AJ; Littlejohns P
Health Econ Policy Law; 2013 Apr; 8(2):145-65. PubMed ID: 22717361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The cancer technology appraisal programme of the UK's National Institute for Clinical Excellence.
Littlejohns P; Barnett D; Longson C;
Lancet Oncol; 2003 Apr; 4(4):242-50. PubMed ID: 12681268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Modifying NICE's Approach to Equity Weighting.
Paulden M; McCabe C
Pharmacoeconomics; 2021 Feb; 39(2):147-160. PubMed ID: 33517512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. What do district health planners in Tanzania think about improving priority setting using 'Accountability for reasonableness'?
Mshana S; Shemilu H; Ndawi B; Momburi R; Olsen OE; Byskov J; Martin DK
BMC Health Serv Res; 2007 Nov; 7():180. PubMed ID: 17997824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. DECISION-COMPONENTS OF NICE'S TECHNOLOGY APPRAISALS ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK.
de Folter J; Trusheim M; Jonsson P; Garner S
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2018 Jan; 34(2):163-171. PubMed ID: 29633673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. SARS and hospital priority setting: a qualitative case study and evaluation.
Bell JA; Hyland S; DePellegrin T; Upshur RE; Bernstein M; Martin DK
BMC Health Serv Res; 2004 Dec; 4(1):36. PubMed ID: 15606924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fairness and accountability for reasonableness. Do the views of priority setting decision makers differ across health systems and levels of decision making?
Kapiriri L; Norheim OF; Martin DK
Soc Sci Med; 2009 Feb; 68(4):766-73. PubMed ID: 19070414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Decentralized health care priority-setting in Tanzania: evaluating against the accountability for reasonableness framework.
Maluka S; Kamuzora P; San Sebastiån M; Byskov J; Olsen ØE; Shayo E; Ndawi B; Hurtig AK
Soc Sci Med; 2010 Aug; 71(4):751-9. PubMed ID: 20554365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Priority setting in a hospital critical care unit: qualitative case study.
Mielke J; Martin DK; Singer PA
Crit Care Med; 2003 Dec; 31(12):2764-8. PubMed ID: 14668612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Financial interests of patient organisations contributing to technology assessment at England's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: policy review.
Mandeville KL; Barker R; Packham A; Sowerby C; Yarrow K; Patrick H
BMJ; 2019 Jan; 364():k5300. PubMed ID: 30651227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]