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 *

102 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32570446)

  • 1. Decision Quality Is a Preference-Sensitive Formative Concept: How Do Some Existing Measures Compare?
    Dowie J; Kaltoft MK
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2020 Jun; 270():562-566. PubMed ID: 32570446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Evaluation of Decision Support Tools Requires a Measure of Decision Quality That Has Content and Construct Validity in Person-Centred Care.
    Kaltoft MK; Nielsen JB; Dowie J
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2018; 247():331-335. PubMed ID: 29677977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Measures of Decision Aid Quality Are Preference-Sensitive and Interest-Conflicted - 2: Empirical Measures.
    Dowie J; Kaltoft MK; Rajput VK
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2020 Nov; 275():52-56. PubMed ID: 33227739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing decision quality in patient-centred care requires a preference-sensitive measure.
    Kaltoft M; Cunich M; Salkeld G; Dowie J
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2014 Apr; 19(2):110-7. PubMed ID: 24335587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Measures of Decision Aid Quality Are Preference-Sensitive and Interest-Conflicted - 1: Normative Measures.
    Dowie J; Kaltoft MK; Rajput VK
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2020 Nov; 275():47-51. PubMed ID: 33227738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Conceptual framework and systematic review of the effects of participants' and professionals' preferences in randomised controlled trials.
    King M; Nazareth I; Lampe F; Bower P; Chandler M; Morou M; Sibbald B; Lai R
    Health Technol Assess; 2005 Sep; 9(35):1-186, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 16153352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Using a 'talk' model of shared decision making to propose an observation-based measure: Observer OPTION 5 Item.
    Elwyn G; Tsulukidze M; Edwards A; Légaré F; Newcombe R
    Patient Educ Couns; 2013 Nov; 93(2):265-71. PubMed ID: 24029581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparative review of generic quality-of-life instruments.
    Coons SJ; Rao S; Keininger DL; Hays RD
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2000 Jan; 17(1):13-35. PubMed ID: 10747763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Medical decision-making and the patient: understanding preference patterns for growth hormone therapy using conjoint analysis.
    Singh J; Cuttler L; Shin M; Silvers JB; Neuhauser D
    Med Care; 1998 Aug; 36(8 Suppl):AS31-45. PubMed ID: 9708581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report.
    Coons SJ; Gwaltney CJ; Hays RD; Lundy JJ; Sloan JA; Revicki DA; Lenderking WR; Cella D; Basch E;
    Value Health; 2009 Jun; 12(4):419-29. PubMed ID: 19900250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Evaluation of Decision Support Tools Needs to Be Preference Context-Sensitive.
    Dowie J; Kaltoft MK
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2019 Aug; 265():163-168. PubMed ID: 31431593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A review of preference-based health-related quality of life questionnaires in spinal cord injury research.
    Whitehurst DG; Noonan VK; Dvorak MF; Bryan S
    Spinal Cord; 2012 Sep; 50(9):646-54. PubMed ID: 22641255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol.
    Sinclair P; Kable A; Levett-Jones T
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2015 Jan; 13(1):52-64. PubMed ID: 26447007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Development and psychometric properties of a brief measure of subjective decision quality for breast cancer treatment.
    Resnicow K; Abrahamse P; Tocco RS; Hawley S; Griggs J; Janz N; Fagerlin A; Wilson A; Ward KC; Gabram SG; Katz S
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2014 Dec; 14():110. PubMed ID: 25476986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing quality of life of patients with hypospadias: A systematic review of validated patient-reported outcome instruments.
    Sullivan KJ; Hunter Z; Andrioli V; Guerra L; Leonard M; Klassen A; Keays MA
    J Pediatr Urol; 2017 Feb; 13(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 28089292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.
    Newell S; Jordan Z
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2015 Jan; 13(1):76-87. PubMed ID: 26447009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prediction of life-story narrative for end-of-life surrogate's decision-making is inadequate: a Q-methodology study.
    Hammami MM; Abuhdeeb K; Hammami MB; De Padua SJS; Al-Balkhi A
    BMC Med Ethics; 2019 May; 20(1):28. PubMed ID: 31053127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The decision partner in healthcare decision-making: A concept analysis.
    Gray TF; Nolan MT; Clayman ML; Wenzel JA
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2019 Apr; 92():79-89. PubMed ID: 30743199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.