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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2927183)

  • 1. Expected utility theory and risky choices with health outcomes.
    Hellinger FJ
    Med Care; 1989 Mar; 27(3):273-9. PubMed ID: 2927183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The measurement of patients' values in medicine.
    Llewellyn-Thomas H; Sutherland HJ; Tibshirani R; Ciampi A; Till JE; Boyd NF
    Med Decis Making; 1982; 2(4):449-62. PubMed ID: 7182703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Risk attitude in gambles with years of life: empirical support for prospect theory.
    Verhoef LC; de Haan AF; van Daal WA
    Med Decis Making; 1994; 14(2):194-200. PubMed ID: 8028473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Neural Mechanisms Underlying Risk and Ambiguity Attitudes.
    Blankenstein NE; Peper JS; Crone EA; van Duijvenvoorde ACK
    J Cogn Neurosci; 2017 Nov; 29(11):1845-1859. PubMed ID: 28686139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Explaining distortions in utility elicitation through the rank-dependent model for risky choices.
    Wakker P; Stiggelbout A
    Med Decis Making; 1995; 15(2):180-6. PubMed ID: 7783579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Do Probability and Certainty Equivalent Techniques Lead to Inconsistent Results? Evidence from Gambles Involving Life-Years and Quality of Life.
    Ruggeri M; Coretti S
    Value Health; 2015 Jun; 18(4):413-24. PubMed ID: 26091595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The Disjunction Effect in two-stage simulated gambles. An experimental study and comparison of a heuristic logistic, Markov and quantum-like model.
    Broekaert JB; Busemeyer JR; Pothos EM
    Cogn Psychol; 2020 Mar; 117():101262. PubMed ID: 31865226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Do risk attitudes differ across domains and respondent types?
    Prosser LA; Wittenberg E
    Med Decis Making; 2007; 27(3):281-7. PubMed ID: 17545498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparing utility functions between risky and riskless choice in rhesus monkeys.
    Bujold PM; Seak LCU; Schultz W; Ferrari-Toniolo S
    Anim Cogn; 2022 Apr; 25(2):385-399. PubMed ID: 34568979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The description-experience gap in risky choice in nonhuman primates.
    Heilbronner SR; Hayden BY
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2016 Apr; 23(2):593-600. PubMed ID: 26286883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The probabilistic nature of preferential choice.
    Rieskamp J
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2008 Nov; 34(6):1446-65. PubMed ID: 18980407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Exaggerated risk: prospect theory and probability weighting in risky choice.
    Kusev P; van Schaik P; Ayton P; Dent J; Chater N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Nov; 35(6):1487-505. PubMed ID: 19857019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Individual classification of strong risk attitudes: An application across lottery types and age groups.
    Kellen D; Mata R; Davis-Stober CP
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2017 Aug; 24(4):1341-1349. PubMed ID: 28063131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Pre-existing brain states predict risky choices.
    Huang YF; Soon CS; Mullette-Gillman OA; Hsieh PJ
    Neuroimage; 2014 Nov; 101():466-72. PubMed ID: 25067816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dealing With Uncertainty: Testing Risk- and Ambiguity-Attitude Across Adolescence.
    Blankenstein NE; Crone EA; van den Bos W; van Duijvenvoorde AC
    Dev Neuropsychol; 2016; 41(1-2):77-92. PubMed ID: 27028162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On the composition of risk preference and belief.
    Wakkar PP
    Psychol Rev; 2004 Jan; 111(1):236-41. PubMed ID: 14756595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Decoy effects in intertemporal and probabilistic choices the role of time pressure, immediacy, and certainty.
    Marini M; Paglieri F
    Behav Processes; 2019 May; 162():130-141. PubMed ID: 30849515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Risk attitudes of anesthesiologists and surgeons in clinical decision making with expected years of life.
    Nakata Y; Okuno-Fujiwara M; Goto T; Morita S
    J Clin Anesth; 2000 Mar; 12(2):146-50. PubMed ID: 10818330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A framework for estimating health state utility values within a discrete choice experiment: modeling risky choices.
    Robinson A; Spencer A; Moffatt P
    Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):341-50. PubMed ID: 25349189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Age, Loss Minimization, and the Role of Probability for Decision-Making.
    Best R; Freund AM
    Gerontology; 2018; 64(5):475-484. PubMed ID: 29621760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.