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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31902024)

  • 1. A comparison of individual and collective decision making for standard gamble and time trade-off.
    Attema AE; Bleichrodt H; l'Haridon O; Lipman SA
    Eur J Health Econ; 2020 Apr; 21(3):465-473. PubMed ID: 31902024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. What is it going to be, TTO or SG? A direct test of the validity of health state valuation.
    Lipman SA; Brouwer WBF; Attema AE
    Health Econ; 2020 Nov; 29(11):1475-1481. PubMed ID: 32744408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. QALYs without bias? Nonparametric correction of time trade-off and standard gamble weights based on prospect theory.
    Lipman SA; Brouwer WBF; Attema AE
    Health Econ; 2019 Jul; 28(7):843-854. PubMed ID: 31237093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Standard gamble, time trade-off and rating scale: experimental results on the ranking properties of QALYs.
    Bleichrodt H; Johannesson M
    J Health Econ; 1997 Apr; 16(2):155-75. PubMed ID: 10169092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Living up to expectations: Experimental tests of subjective life expectancy as reference point in time trade-off and standard gamble.
    Lipman SA; Brouwer WBF; Attema AE
    J Health Econ; 2020 May; 71():102318. PubMed ID: 32229049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Toward a more universal approach in health valuation.
    Craig BM; Busschbach JJ
    Health Econ; 2011 Jul; 20(7):864-75. PubMed ID: 20677328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities.
    Bleichrodt H
    Health Econ; 2002 Jul; 11(5):447-56. PubMed ID: 12112493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact of caregiver and parenting status on time trade-off and standard gamble utility scores for health state descriptions.
    Matza LS; Boye KS; Feeny DH; Johnston JA; Bowman L; Jordan JB
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2014 Apr; 12():48. PubMed ID: 24716709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The Corrective Approach: Policy Implications of Recent Developments in QALY Measurement Based on Prospect Theory.
    Lipman SA; Brouwer WBF; Attema AE
    Value Health; 2019 Jul; 22(7):816-821. PubMed ID: 31277829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of standard gamble, time trade-off, and adjusted time trade-off scores.
    Martin AJ; Glasziou PP; Simes RJ; Lumley T
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(1):137-47. PubMed ID: 10815360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Feasibility, comparability, and reliability of the standard gamble compared with the rating scale and time trade-off techniques in Korean population.
    Kim SH; Lee SI; Jo MW
    Qual Life Res; 2017 Dec; 26(12):3387-3397. PubMed ID: 28801862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of different valuation methods for population health status measured by the EQ-5D in three European countries.
    Bernert S; Fernández A; Haro JM; König HH; Alonso J; Vilagut G; Sevilla-Dedieu C; de Graaf R; Matschinger H; Heider D; Angermeyer MC;
    Value Health; 2009; 12(5):750-8. PubMed ID: 19490564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A comparison of methods for converting DCE values onto the full health-dead QALY scale.
    Rowen D; Brazier J; Van Hout B
    Med Decis Making; 2015 Apr; 35(3):328-40. PubMed ID: 25398621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Are people consistent when trading time for health?
    Oliver A; Wolff J
    Econ Hum Biol; 2014 Dec; 15():41-6. PubMed ID: 24953641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Valuing Child Health Utility 9D health states with a young adolescent sample: a feasibility study to compare best-worst scaling discrete-choice experiment, standard gamble and time trade-off methods.
    Ratcliffe J; Couzner L; Flynn T; Sawyer M; Stevens K; Brazier J; Burgess L
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2011; 9(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 21033766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Validity, feasibility and acceptability of time trade-off and standard gamble assessments in health valuation studies: a study in a multiethnic Asian population in Singapore.
    Wee HL; Li SC; Xie F; Zhang XH; Luo N; Feeny D; Cheung YB; Machin D; Fong KY; Thumboo J
    Value Health; 2008 Mar; 11 Suppl 1():S3-10. PubMed ID: 18387064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Measuring utilities of severe facial disfigurement and composite tissue allotransplantation of the face in patients with severe face and neck burns from the perspectives of the general public, medical experts and patients.
    Chuback J; Yarascavitch B; Yarascavitch A; Kaur MN; Martin S; Thoma A
    Burns; 2015 Nov; 41(7):1524-31. PubMed ID: 26068209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. On the (not so) constant proportional trade-off in TTO.
    Attema AE; Brouwer WB
    Qual Life Res; 2010 May; 19(4):489-97. PubMed ID: 20151207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Challenges in health state valuation in paediatric economic evaluation: are QALYs contraindicated?
    Ungar WJ
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2011 Aug; 29(8):641-52. PubMed ID: 21604821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Mapping visual analogue scale health state valuations onto standard gamble and time trade-off values.
    Dolan P; Sutton M
    Soc Sci Med; 1997 May; 44(10):1519-30. PubMed ID: 9160441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.