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.
93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30990265)
41. EVALUATION OF PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT INITIATIVES IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: A SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES. Weeks L; Polisena J; Scott AM; Holtorf AP; Staniszewska S; Facey K Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(6):715-723. PubMed ID: 29122048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Health-state utility estimates for health technology assessment: a review of the manufacturers' submissions to the French National Authority for Health. Hamers FF; Ghabri S; Le Gales C Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2017 Oct; 17(5):489-494. PubMed ID: 28133977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Patient-based health technology assessment: a vision of the future. Bridges JF; Jones C Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(1):30-5. PubMed ID: 17234014 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. An international survey of the public engagement practices of health technology assessment organizations. Whitty JA Value Health; 2013; 16(1):155-63. PubMed ID: 23337227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. CONTRIBUTION OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT TO THE IMPACT OF A HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: AN IRISH CASE STUDY. Ryan M; Moran PS; Harrington P; Murphy L; O'Neill M; Whelan M; Teljeur C Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(4):424-429. PubMed ID: 29032786 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Introducing patients' and the public's perspectives to health technology assessment: A systematic review of international experiences. Gagnon MP; Desmartis M; Lepage-Savary D; Gagnon J; St-Pierre M; Rhainds M; Lemieux R; Gauvin FP; Pollender H; Légaré F Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2011 Jan; 27(1):31-42. PubMed ID: 21262085 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Health technology assessment in South Korea. Kim CY Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():219-23. PubMed ID: 19527540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. French Health Technology Assessment of Antineoplastic Drugs Indicated in the Treatment of Solid Tumours: Perspective for Future Trends. Chouaid C; Borget I; Braun E; Bazil ML; Schaetz D; Rémuzat C; Toumi M Target Oncol; 2016 Aug; 11(4):515-34. PubMed ID: 26830301 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Assessing the impacts of citizen deliberations on the health technology process. Abelson J; Bombard Y; Gauvin FP; Simeonov D; Boesveld S Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Jul; 29(3):282-9. PubMed ID: 23863188 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN EVALUATION OF PHARMACEUTICALS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC. Vostalová L; Mazelová J; Samek J; Vocelka M Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(3):339-344. PubMed ID: 28438231 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Development and implementation of health technology assessment in Argentina: two steps forward and one step back. Rubinstein A; Pichon-Riviere A; Augustovski F Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():260-9. PubMed ID: 19527545 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review. Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. INSIGHTS FROM THE FRONT LINES: A COLLECTION OF STORIES OF HTA IMPACT FROM INAHTA MEMBER AGENCIES. Schuller T; Söderholm Werkö S Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(4):409-410. PubMed ID: 29241477 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. 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]
55. A thematic analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of manufacturers' submissions to the NICE Single Technology Assessment (STA) process. Carroll C; Kaltenthaler E; FitzGerald P; Boland A; Dickson R Health Policy; 2011 Oct; 102(2-3):136-44. PubMed ID: 21763025 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Health Technology Assessment for Molecular Diagnostics: Practices, Challenges, and Recommendations from the Medical Devices and Diagnostics Special Interest Group. Garfield S; Polisena J; S Spinner D; Postulka A; Y Lu C; Tiwana SK; Faulkner E; Poulios N; Zah V; Longacre M Value Health; 2016; 19(5):577-87. PubMed ID: 27565275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Combining multi-criteria decision analysis and mini-health technology assessment: A funding decision-support tool for medical devices in a university hospital setting. Martelli N; Hansen P; van den Brink H; Boudard A; Cordonnier AL; Devaux C; Pineau J; Prognon P; Borget I J Biomed Inform; 2016 Feb; 59():201-8. PubMed ID: 26705065 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Involvement of consumers in health technology assessment activities by Inahta agencies. Hailey D; Werkö S; Bakri R; Cameron A; Göhlen B; Myles S; Pwu J; Yothasamut J Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Jan; 29(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 23217279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Health technology assessment in Denmark: strategy, implementation, and developments. Sigmund H; Kristensen FB Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():94-101. PubMed ID: 19505351 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Historical development of health technology assessment in Thailand. Teerawattananon Y; Tantivess S; Yothasamut J; Kingkaew P; Chaisiri K Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Jul; 25 Suppl 1():241-52. PubMed ID: 19527543 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]