182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30528244)
1. Using a stated preference discrete choice experiment to assess societal value from the perspective of decision-makers in Europe. Does it work for rare diseases?
López-Bastida J; Ramos-Goñi JM; Aranda-Reneo I; Trapero-Bertran M; Kanavos P; Rodriguez Martin B
Health Policy; 2019 Feb; 123(2):152-158. PubMed ID: 30528244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Using a stated preference discrete choice experiment to assess societal value from the perspective of patients with rare diseases in Italy.
López-Bastida J; Ramos-Goñi JM; Aranda-Reneo I; Taruscio D; Magrelli A; Kanavos P
Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2019 Jun; 14(1):154. PubMed ID: 31242905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Societal Preferences for Funding Orphan Drugs in the United Kingdom: An Application of Person Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiment Methods.
Bourke SM; Plumpton CO; Hughes DA
Value Health; 2018 May; 21(5):538-546. PubMed ID: 29753350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Societal preferences for funding orphan drugs in China: An application of the discrete choice experiment method.
Tan S; Wang Y; Tang Y; Jiang R; Chen M; Chen H; Yang F
Front Public Health; 2022; 10():1005453. PubMed ID: 36579068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Challenges in measuring the societal value of orphan drugs: insights from a canadian stated preference survey.
Dragojlovic N; Rizzardo S; Bansback N; Mitton C; Marra CA; Lynd LD
Patient; 2015 Feb; 8(1):93-101. PubMed ID: 25586645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Valuation of Treatments for Rare Diseases: A Systematic Literature Review of Societal Preference Studies.
Dabbous O; Chachoua L; Aballéa S; Sivignon M; Persson U; Petrou S; Richardson J; Simoens S; Toumi M
Adv Ther; 2023 Feb; 40(2):393-424. PubMed ID: 36451072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A discrete choice experiment investigating preferences for funding drugs used to treat orphan diseases: an exploratory study.
Mentzakis E; Stefanowska P; Hurley J
Health Econ Policy Law; 2011 Jul; 6(3):405-33. PubMed ID: 21205401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Exploring the social value of health-care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment.
Green C; Gerard K
Health Econ; 2009 Aug; 18(8):951-76. PubMed ID: 19034951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Global spending on orphan drugs in France, Germany, the UK, Italy and Spain during 2007.
Orofino J; Soto J; Casado MA; Oyagüez I
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2010; 8(5):301-15. PubMed ID: 20804223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Dealing with Uncertainty and Accounting for Social Value Judgments in Assessments of Orphan Drugs: Evidence from Four European Countries.
Nicod E; Berg Brigham K; Durand-Zaleski I; Kanavos P
Value Health; 2017; 20(7):919-926. PubMed ID: 28712621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for the reimbursement of orphan drugs (FinMHU-MCDA study).
de Andrés-Nogales F; Cruz E; Calleja MÁ; Delgado O; Gorgas MQ; Espín J; Mestre-Ferrándiz J; Palau F; Ancochea A; Arce R; Domínguez-Hernández R; Casado MÁ;
Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2021 Apr; 16(1):186. PubMed ID: 33902672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Public and decision-maker stated preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions in Iran: an application of the discrete choice experiment.
Afsharmanesh G; Rahimi F; Zarei L; Peiravian F; Mehralian G
J Pharm Policy Pract; 2021 Sep; 14(1):74. PubMed ID: 34488901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Determinants of orphan drugs prices in France: a regression analysis.
Korchagina D; Millier A; Vataire AL; Aballea S; Falissard B; Toumi M
Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2017 Apr; 12(1):75. PubMed ID: 28427466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic review on the evaluation criteria of orphan medicines in Central and Eastern European countries.
Zelei T; Molnár MJ; Szegedi M; Kaló Z
Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2016 Jun; 11(1):72. PubMed ID: 27259284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Australian Public Preferences for the Funding of New Health Technologies: A Comparison of Discrete Choice and Profile Case Best-Worst Scaling Methods.
Whitty JA; Ratcliffe J; Chen G; Scuffham PA
Med Decis Making; 2014 Jul; 34(5):638-54. PubMed ID: 24713695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparing Preferences for Disease Profiles: A Discrete Choice Experiment from a US Societal Perspective.
Johnston KM; Audhya IF; Dunne J; Feeny D; Neumann P; Malone DC; Szabo SM; Gooch KL
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2024 May; 22(3):343-352. PubMed ID: 38253973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparative analysis of decision maker preferences for equity/efficiency attributes in reimbursement decisions in three European countries.
Baji P; García-Goñi M; Gulácsi L; Mentzakis E; Paolucci F
Eur J Health Econ; 2016 Sep; 17(7):791-9. PubMed ID: 26296623
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Survival or Mortality: Does Risk Attribute Framing Influence Decision-Making Behavior in a Discrete Choice Experiment?
Veldwijk J; Essers BA; Lambooij MS; Dirksen CD; Smit HA; de Wit GA
Value Health; 2016; 19(2):202-9. PubMed ID: 27021754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey.
Webb EJD; Meads D; Lynch Y; Judge S; Randall N; Goldbart J; Meredith S; Moulam L; Hess S; Murray J
Value Health; 2021 Apr; 24(4):575-584. PubMed ID: 33840436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Choosing vs. allocating: discrete choice experiments and constant-sum paired comparisons for the elicitation of societal preferences.
Skedgel CD; Wailoo AJ; Akehurst RL
Health Expect; 2015 Oct; 18(5):1227-40. PubMed ID: 23758539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
