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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28597373)

  • 1. Giving Patients a Meaningful Voice in European Health Technology Assessments: The Role of Health Preference Research.
    Mühlbacher AC; Johnson FR
    Patient; 2017 Aug; 10(4):527-530. PubMed ID: 28597373
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Best practice in undertaking and reporting health technology assessments. Working group 4 report.
    Velasco M; Perleth M; Drummond M; Gürtner F; Jørgensen T; Jovell A; Malone J; Rüther A; Wild C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2002; 18(2):361-422. PubMed ID: 12053427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Standardization of the economic evaluation of health technologies. European developments.
    Rovira J
    Med Care; 1996 Dec; 34(12 Suppl):DS182-8. PubMed ID: 8969325
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. HOW TO AVOID GIVING THE RIGHT ANSWERS TO THE WRONG QUESTIONS: THE NEED FOR INTEGRATED ASSESSMENTS OF COMPLEX HEALTH TECHNOLOGIES.
    Gerhardus A; Oortwijn W; van der Wilt GJ
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(5):541-543. PubMed ID: 29166969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. POTENTIAL FOR PATIENTS AND PATIENT-DRIVEN ORGANIZATIONS TO IMPROVE EVIDENCE FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.
    Low E
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(4):226-7. PubMed ID: 26585562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. EUR-ASSESS Project Subgroup report on Methodology. Methodological guidance for the conduct of health technology assessment.
    Liberati A; Sheldon TA; Banta HD
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1997; 13(2):186-219. PubMed ID: 9194352
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Process for health care technology assessments and recommendations for coverage--AHCPR.
    Fed Regist; 1993 Dec; 58(231):63988-91. PubMed ID: 10130785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Giving Patients a Meaningful Voice in United States Regulatory Decision Making: The Role for Health Preference Research.
    Johnson FR; Beusterien K; Özdemir S; Wilson L
    Patient; 2017 Aug; 10(4):523-526. PubMed ID: 28597374
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Towards Meaningful Engagement for the Patient Voice.
    Pitts PJ
    Patient; 2019 Aug; 12(4):361-363. PubMed ID: 31165399
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [HTA goes Europe: European collaboration on joint assessment and methodological issues becomes reality].
    Nachtnebel A; Mayer J; Erdös J; Lampe K; Kleijnen S; Schnell-Inderst P; Wild C
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2015; 109(4-5):291-9. PubMed ID: 26354129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Giving members a say in benefit plan design. Group Health Cooperative and Geisinger Health Plan are two insurers that want members to weigh in on coverage issues.
    Milano C
    Manag Care; 2011 Jul; 20(7):42-5. PubMed ID: 21848199
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Technology assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis: misguided guidelines?
    Naylor CD; Williams JI; Basinski A; Goel V
    CMAJ; 1993 Mar; 148(6):921-4. PubMed ID: 8448706
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The need for Health Technology Assessments of PET.
    Van Tinteren H; Hoekstra OS; Boers M
    Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2003 Oct; 30(10):1438-9; author reply 1439. PubMed ID: 12898206
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. AAMI Standards: A History of Ensuring Medical Technology Quality and Performance.
    Lewelling J
    Biomed Instrum Technol; 2017; 51(3):210-211. PubMed ID: 28530882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Differences among formulary submission guidelines: implications for health technology assessment.
    Mauskopf J; Walter J; Birt J; Bowman L; Copley-Merriman C; Drummond M
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2011 Jul; 27(3):261-70. PubMed ID: 21756414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Eunethta: further steps towards European cooperation on health technology assessment.
    Guegan EW; Huić M; Teljeur C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2014 Nov; 30(5):475-7. PubMed ID: 25747555
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations revisited.
    Laupacis A; Feeny D; Detsky AS; Tugwell PX
    CMAJ; 1993 Mar; 148(6):927-9. PubMed ID: 8448707
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. WHO review committee makes NICE recommendations.
    McLellan F
    Lancet; 2003 Sep; 362(9388):966. PubMed ID: 14513843
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Policies for Use of Real-World Data in Health Technology Assessment (HTA): A Comparative Study of Six HTA Agencies.
    Makady A; Ham RT; de Boer A; Hillege H; Klungel O; Goettsch W;
    Value Health; 2017 Apr; 20(4):520-532. PubMed ID: 28407993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Diagnostic technology assessments: problems and prospects.
    Kent DL; Larson EB
    Ann Intern Med; 1988 May; 108(5):759-61. PubMed ID: 3358576
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.