158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32524923)
1. Analysis of PBAC submissions and outcomes for medicines (2010-2018).
Lybrand S; Wonder M
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2020 Jun; 36(3):224-231. PubMed ID: 32524923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Are cancer drugs less likely to be recommended for listing by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia?
Chim L; Kelly PJ; Salkeld G; Stockler MR
Pharmacoeconomics; 2010; 28(6):463-75. PubMed ID: 20465315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and implications for paediatric prescribing.
Sinha Y; Brien JA; Craig JC
J Paediatr Child Health; 2009 Jun; 45(6):351-7. PubMed ID: 19490409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Are Australians able to access new medicines on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme in a more or less timely manner? An analysis of pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee recommendations, 1999-2003.
Wonder MJ; Neville AM; Parsons R
Value Health; 2006; 9(4):205-12. PubMed ID: 16903989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. PHARMACEUTICAL BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS IN AUSTRALIA.
Turkstra E; Bettington E; Donohue ML; Mervin MC
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2017 Jan; 33(4):521-528. PubMed ID: 28703092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Delays in access to affordable medicines: putting policy into perspective.
Pearce A; van Gool K; Haywood P; Haas M
Aust Health Rev; 2012 Nov; 36(4):412-8. PubMed ID: 23062753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The use of QALY weights for QALY calculations: a review of industry submissions requesting listing on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 2002-4.
Scuffham PA; Whitty JA; Mitchell A; Viney R
Pharmacoeconomics; 2008; 26(4):297-310. PubMed ID: 18370565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Key considerations in reimbursement decision-making for multiple sclerosis drugs in Australia.
Phan YHL; De Abreu Lourenco R; Haas M; van der Linden N
Mult Scler Relat Disord; 2018 Oct; 25():144-149. PubMed ID: 30077086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment of the Quality of the Clinical Evidence in Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Fit for Purpose?
Wonder M; Dunlop S
Value Health; 2015 Jun; 18(4):467-76. PubMed ID: 26091601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Factors associated with Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee decisions for listing medicines for diabetes and its associated complications.
Haque MM; Gumbie M; Gu M; Dissanayake G
Aust Health Rev; 2023 Apr; 47(2):139-147. PubMed ID: 36543249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in australia (1991 to 1996).
George B; Harris A; Mitchell A
Pharmacoeconomics; 2001; 19(11):1103-9. PubMed ID: 11735677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Medicines and the media: news reports of medicines recommended for government reimbursement in Australia.
Robertson J; Walkom EJ; Bevan MD; Newby DA
BMC Public Health; 2013 May; 13():489. PubMed ID: 23687910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparing the ICERs in Medicine Reimbursement Submissions to NICE and PBAC-Does the Presence of an Explicit Threshold Affect the ICER Proposed?
Wang S; Gum D; Merlin T
Value Health; 2018 Aug; 21(8):938-943. PubMed ID: 30098671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. What impact does 'conventional' economic evaluation have on patient access to new orphan medicines? A comparative study of their reimbursement in Australia (2005-2012).
Wonder M; Chin G
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 15(5):843-50. PubMed ID: 25938794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Analysis of sponsor hearings on health technology assessment decision making.
Flowers M; Lybrand S; Wonder M
Aust Health Rev; 2020 Apr; 44(2):258-262. PubMed ID: 31072455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evidence-based decision-making within Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme.
Lopert R
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund); 2009 Jul; 60():1-13. PubMed ID: 19639714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Acceptance of health technology assessment submissions with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios above the cost-effectiveness threshold.
Griffiths EA; Hendrich JK; Stoddart SD; Walsh SC
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 7():463-76. PubMed ID: 26366099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Relationship between financial impact and coverage of drugs in Australia.
Mauskopf J; Chirila C; Masaquel C; Boye KS; Bowman L; Birt J; Grainger D
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2013 Jan; 29(1):92-100. PubMed ID: 23217275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Justifying the source of external comparators in single-arm oncology health technology submissions: a review of NICE and PBAC assessments.
Appiah K; Rizzo M; Sarri G; Hernandez L
J Comp Eff Res; 2024 Feb; 13(2):e230140. PubMed ID: 38174576
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
