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 *

133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29441502)

  • 61. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)--explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force.
    Husereau D; Drummond M; Petrou S; Carswell C; Moher D; Greenberg D; Augustovski F; Briggs AH; Mauskopf J; Loder E;
    Value Health; 2013; 16(2):231-50. PubMed ID: 23538175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. No. 385-Indications for Pelvic Examination.
    Evans D; Goldstein S; Loewy A; Altman AD
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2019 Aug; 41(8):1221-1234. PubMed ID: 31331610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Costing evidence for health care decision-making in Austria: A systematic review.
    Mayer S; Kiss N; Łaszewska A; Simon J
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(8):e0183116. PubMed ID: 28806728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. The French National Authority for Health (HAS) Guidelines for Conducting Budget Impact Analyses (BIA).
    Ghabri S; Autin E; Poullié AI; Josselin JM
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Apr; 36(4):407-417. PubMed ID: 29247437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. A Comparison of Pharmaceutical Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) Recommendations Amongst the Canadian Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB), Public and Private Payers.
    Foroutan N; Tarride JE; Xie F; Mills F; Levine M
    Pharmacoecon Open; 2019 Dec; 3(4):437-451. PubMed ID: 31041614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions.
    Pollock M; Fernandes RM; Hartling L
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2017 Mar; 17(1):48. PubMed ID: 28335734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a protocol for a systematic review of characteristics and methods applied.
    Luhnen M; Prediger B; Neugebauer EAM; Mathes T
    Syst Rev; 2017 Dec; 6(1):238. PubMed ID: 29197411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Virtual chromoendoscopy for the real-time assessment of colorectal polyps in vivo: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
    Picot J; Rose M; Cooper K; Pickett K; Lord J; Harris P; Whyte S; Böhning D; Shepherd J
    Health Technol Assess; 2017 Dec; 21(79):1-308. PubMed ID: 29271339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Using economic evaluations to make formulary coverage decisions. So much for guidelines.
    Anis AH; Gagnon Y
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2000 Jul; 18(1):55-62. PubMed ID: 11010604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Breast cancer, pregnancy, and breastfeeding.
    Helewa M; Lévesque P; Provencher D; Lea RH; Rosolowich V; Shapiro HM;
    J Obstet Gynaecol Can; 2002 Feb; 24(2):164-80; quiz 181-4. PubMed ID: 12196882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Activities of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance: An Observational Analysis.
    Rocchi A; Mills F
    J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol; 2018 Aug; 25(2):e12-e22. PubMed ID: 30725539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Pharmacoeconomics Evaluations of Oral Anticancer Agents: Systematic Review of Characteristics, Methodological Trends, and Reporting Quality.
    Al Kadour A; Marridi WA; Al-Badriyeh D
    Value Health Reg Issues; 2018 Sep; 16():46-60. PubMed ID: 30144775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. What is the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for tendinopathy? An overview of systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness and systematic review of economic evaluations.
    Long L; Briscoe S; Cooper C; Hyde C; Crathorne L
    Health Technol Assess; 2015 Jan; 19(8):1-134. PubMed ID: 25629427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Specific, Fair and Transparent: A Canadian Process for Funding Drugs for Rare Diseases.
    Stevenson H
    Healthc Pap; 2023 Jan; 21(1):28-33. PubMed ID: 36692913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Health Technology Assessment Reports for Non-Oncology Medications in Canada from 2018 to 2022: Methodological Critiques on Manufacturers' Submissions and a Comparison between Manufacturer and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) Analyses.
    Mirzayeh Fashami F; Tarride JE; Sadeghirad B; Hariri K; Peyrovinasab A; Levine M
    Pharmacoecon Open; 2024 Aug; ():. PubMed ID: 39103675
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Conditional Funding Recommendations for Drugs in Canada: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
    Graili P
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2023 Jul; 21(4):673-681. PubMed ID: 36609982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Appraisals by Health Technology Assessment Agencies of Economic Evaluations Submitted as Part of Reimbursement Dossiers for Oncology Treatments: Evidence from Canada, the UK, and Australia.
    Ball G; Levine MAH; Thabane L; Tarride JE
    Curr Oncol; 2022 Oct; 29(10):7624-7636. PubMed ID: 36290879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. How Sensitive is Sensitivity Analysis?: Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomic Submissions in Korea.
    Bae S; Lee J; Bae EY
    Front Pharmacol; 2022; 13():884769. PubMed ID: 35652044
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Onwards and Upwards: A Systematic Survey of Economic Evaluation Methods in Oncology.
    Ball G; Levine M; Thabane L; Tarride JE
    Pharmacoecon Open; 2021 Sep; 5(3):397-410. PubMed ID: 33893974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.