174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31043821)
21. Strategizing health technology assessment for containment of cancer drug costs in a universal health care system: Case of the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review.
Niraula S
Cancer; 2019 Sep; 125(18):3100-3103. PubMed ID: 31154671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Examining the association between oncology drug clinical benefit and the time to public reimbursement.
Thomson S; Everest L; Witzke N; Jiao T; Delos Santos S; Nguyen V; Cheung MC; Chan KKW
Cancer Med; 2022 Jan; 11(2):380-391. PubMed ID: 34850587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Continental Divide? The attitudes of US and Canadian oncologists on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and health policies associated with new cancer drugs.
Berry SR; Bell CM; Ubel PA; Evans WK; Nadler E; Strevel EL; Neumann PJ
J Clin Oncol; 2010 Sep; 28(27):4149-53. PubMed ID: 20697077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Attitude of Iranian Medical Oncologists Toward Economic Aspects, and Policy-making in Relation to New Cancer Drugs.
Daroudi R; Mirzania M; Zendehdel K
Int J Health Policy Manag; 2015 Oct; 5(2):99-105. PubMed ID: 26927395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada.
Hoch JS; Hodgson DC; Earle CC
J Clin Oncol; 2012 Dec; 30(34):4262-6. PubMed ID: 23071242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Application of a policy framework for the public funding of drugs for rare diseases.
Winquist E; Coyle D; Clarke JT; Evans GA; Seager C; Chan W; Martin J
J Gen Intern Med; 2014 Aug; 29 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S774-9. PubMed ID: 25029973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. How do cost-effectiveness analyses inform reimbursement decisions for oncology medicines in Canada? The example of sunitinib for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Chabot I; Rocchi A
Value Health; 2010; 13(6):837-45. PubMed ID: 20561332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Using pharmacoeconomic analysis to make drug insurance coverage decisions.
Anis AH; Rahman T; Schechter MT
Pharmacoeconomics; 1998 Jan; 13(1 Pt 2):119-26. PubMed ID: 10176146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Is it all about price? Why requests for government subsidy of anticancer drugs were rejected in Australia.
Karikios DJ; Chim L; Martin A; Nagrial A; Howard K; Salkeld G; Stockler MR
Intern Med J; 2017 Apr; 47(4):400-407. PubMed ID: 27928875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. New treatments for advanced cancer: an approach to prioritization.
Ferguson JS; Summerhayes M; Masters S; Schey S; Smith IE
Br J Cancer; 2000 Nov; 83(10):1268-73. PubMed ID: 11044348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. [Funding and sponsorship of clinical trials in oncology].
Bruns J
Onkologie; 2010; 33 Suppl 7():16-8. PubMed ID: 20926909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. European perspective on the costs and cost-effectiveness of cancer therapies.
Drummond MF; Mason AR
J Clin Oncol; 2007 Jan; 25(2):191-5. PubMed ID: 17210939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Telemedicine for the Medicare population: pediatric, obstetric, and clinician-indirect home interventions.
Hersh WR; Wallace JA; Patterson PK; Shapiro SE; Kraemer DF; Eilers GM; Chan BK; Greenlick MR; Helfand M
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ); 2001 Aug; (24 Suppl):1-32. PubMed ID: 11569328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. American Society of Clinical Oncology guidance statement: the cost of cancer care.
Meropol NJ; Schrag D; Smith TJ; Mulvey TM; Langdon RM; Blum D; Ubel PA; Schnipper LE;
J Clin Oncol; 2009 Aug; 27(23):3868-74. PubMed ID: 19581533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Ethical Hurdles in the Prioritization of Oncology Care.
de Groot F; Capri S; Castanier JC; Cunningham D; Flamion B; Flume M; Herholz H; Levin LÅ; Solà-Morales O; Rupprecht CJ; Shalet N; Walker A; Wong O
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2017 Apr; 15(2):119-126. PubMed ID: 27766548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Evidence, values, and funding decisions in Canadian cancer systems.
Peacock SJ; Regier DA; Raymakers AJN; Chan KKW
Healthc Manage Forum; 2019 Nov; 32(6):293-298. PubMed ID: 31645144
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Perceptions of Oncologists, Healthcare Policy Makers, Patients and the General Population on the Value of Pharmaceutical Treatments in Oncology.
Sacristán JA; Lizan L; Comellas M; Garrido P; Avendaño C; Cruz-Hernández JJ; Espinosa J; Dilla T
Adv Ther; 2016 Nov; 33(11):2059-2068. PubMed ID: 27718158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Do oncologists believe new cancer drugs offer good value?
Nadler E; Eckert B; Neumann PJ
Oncologist; 2006 Feb; 11(2):90-5. PubMed ID: 16476830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Oncology pharmaceutical funding in New Zealand: a different approach and a proposal.
Beatty PA; Laking GR
J Oncol Pract; 2015 May; 11(3):249-51. PubMed ID: 25829524
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
