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.
130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31556793)
1. Comparison of Rating Scale, Time Tradeoff, and Conjoint Analysis Methods for Assessment of Preferences in Prostate Cancer. Kaplan RM; Crespi CM; Dahan E; Saucedo JD; Pagan C; Saigal CS Med Decis Making; 2019 Oct; 39(7):816-826. PubMed ID: 31556793 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Treatment preference and patient centered prostate cancer care: Design and rationale. Jayadevappa R; Chhatre S; Gallo JJ; Wittink M; Morales KH; Bruce Malkowicz S; Lee D; Guzzo T; Caruso A; Van Arsdalen K; Wein AJ; Sanford Schwartz J Contemp Clin Trials; 2015 Nov; 45(Pt B):296-301. PubMed ID: 26435200 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Preferences for Prostate Cancer Outcomes: A Comparison of the Patient Perspective, the General Population Perspective, and a Population at Risk for Prostate Cancer. Gries KS; Regier DA; Ramsey SD; Patrick DL Value Health; 2016; 19(2):218-25. PubMed ID: 27021756 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. Ryan M; Scott DA; Reeves C; Bate A; van Teijlingen ER; Russell EM; Napper M; Robb CM Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(5):1-186. PubMed ID: 11262422 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Preference assessment method affects decision-analytic recommendations: a prostate cancer treatment example. Elkin EB; Cowen ME; Cahill D; Steffel M; Kattan MW Med Decis Making; 2004; 24(5):504-10. PubMed ID: 15358999 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Preference-based measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in children with chronic musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). Brunner HI; Maker D; Grundland B; Young NL; Blanchette V; Stain AM; Feldman BM Med Decis Making; 2003; 23(4):314-22. PubMed ID: 12926581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of time-tradeoff utilities and rating scale values of cancer patients and their relatives: evidence for a possible plateau relationship. O'Leary JF; Fairclough DL; Jankowski MK; Weeks JC Med Decis Making; 1995; 15(2):132-7. PubMed ID: 7783573 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Conjoint analysis versus rating and ranking for values elicitation and clarification in colorectal cancer screening. Pignone MP; Brenner AT; Hawley S; Sheridan SL; Lewis CL; Jonas DE; Howard K J Gen Intern Med; 2012 Jan; 27(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 21870192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Measuring preferences for health care interventions using conjoint analysis: an application to HIV testing. Phillips KA; Maddala T; Johnson FR Health Serv Res; 2002 Dec; 37(6):1681-705. PubMed ID: 12546292 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Measuring preferences for analgesic treatment for cancer pain: how do African-Americans and Whites perform on choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis experiments? Meghani SH; Chittams J; Hanlon AL; Curry J BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2013 Oct; 13():118. PubMed ID: 24134426 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Prostate cancer survivors with a passive role preference in treatment decision-making are less satisfied with information received: Results from the PROFILES registry. Cuypers M; Lamers RED; de Vries M; Husson O; Kil PJM; van de Poll-Franse LV Urol Oncol; 2016 Nov; 34(11):482.e11-482.e18. PubMed ID: 27432432 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Identification of Preference "Phenotypes" in Men With Prostate Cancer. Saigal C; Hollenbeck B; Penson D; Williams K; Kwan L; Saucedo J; Bergman J Urol Pract; 2024 Jul; 11(4):717-725. PubMed ID: 38899681 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: implications for clinical policy. Krahn M; Ritvo P; Irvine J; Tomlinson G; Bremner KE; Bezjak A; Trachtenberg J; Naglie G Med Care; 2003 Jan; 41(1):153-64. PubMed ID: 12544552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Integrating Patient Preference into Treatment Decisions for Men with Prostate Cancer at the Point of Care. Johnson DC; Mueller DE; Deal AM; Dunn MW; Smith AB; Woods ME; Wallen EM; Pruthi RS; Nielsen ME J Urol; 2016 Dec; 196(6):1640-1644. PubMed ID: 27346032 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the performance of utility techniques in the absence of a gold standard. Giesler RB; Ashton CM; Brody B; Byrne MM; Cook K; Geraci JM; Hanita M; Souchek J; Wray NP Med Care; 1999 Jun; 37(6):580-8. PubMed ID: 10386570 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Patients' Preferences for the Treatment of Metastatic Castrate-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment. Eliasson L; de Freitas HM; Dearden L; Calimlim B; Lloyd AJ Clin Ther; 2017 Apr; 39(4):723-737. PubMed ID: 28366592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The validity of QALYs: an experimental test of constant proportional tradeoff and utility independence. Bleichrodt H; Johannesson M Med Decis Making; 1997; 17(1):21-32. PubMed ID: 8994148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Caregiver preferences for emerging duchenne muscular dystrophy treatments: a comparison of best-worst scaling and conjoint analysis. Hollin IL; Peay HL; Bridges JF Patient; 2015 Feb; 8(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 25523316 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure. Litwin MS; Hays RD; Fink A; Ganz PA; Leake B; Brook RH Med Care; 1998 Jul; 36(7):1002-12. PubMed ID: 9674618 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Patients' preferences for communicating a prostate cancer diagnosis and participating in medical decision-making. Davison BJ; Parker PA; Goldenberg SL BJU Int; 2004 Jan; 93(1):47-51. PubMed ID: 14678366 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]