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.
99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32946293)
21. Estimating Utility Values for Health States of DFU Patients Using EQ-5D-5L and cTTO. Arab-Zozani M; Safari H; Dori Z; Afshari S; Ameri H; Namiranian N; Hoseini E; Jafari A Int J Low Extrem Wounds; 2022 Mar; 21(1):41-49. PubMed ID: 33939495 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Utility values in patients with acquired anophthalmus. Hirneiss C; Neubauer AS; Herold TR; Kampik A; Hintschich C Orbit; 2009; 28(6):332-6. PubMed ID: 19929654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Valuation of Health States Considered to Be Worse Than Death-An Analysis of Composite Time Trade-Off Data From 5 EQ-5D-5L Valuation Studies. Gandhi M; Rand K; Luo N Value Health; 2019 Mar; 22(3):370-376. PubMed ID: 30832976 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Vision-and health-related quality of life in patients with uveitis]. Zhang J; Yan HG; Chi Y; Guo CY; Yang L Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2016 Jun; 52(6):429-36. PubMed ID: 27373571 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Test-Retest Reliability of EQ-5D-5L Valuation Techniques: The Composite Time Trade-Off and Discrete Choice Experiments. Purba FD; Hunfeld JAM; Timman R; Iskandarsyah A; Fitriana TS; Sadarjoen SS; Passchier J; Busschbach JJV Value Health; 2018 Oct; 21(10):1243-1249. PubMed ID: 30314626 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparison of online and face-to-face valuation of the EQ-5D-5L using composite time trade-off. Jiang R; Shaw J; Mühlbacher A; Lee TA; Walton S; Kohlmann T; Norman R; Pickard AS Qual Life Res; 2021 May; 30(5):1433-1444. PubMed ID: 33247810 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. New methods for modelling EQ-5D-5L value sets: An application to English data. Feng Y; Devlin NJ; Shah KK; Mulhern B; van Hout B Health Econ; 2018 Jan; 27(1):23-38. PubMed ID: 28833854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The Utility of 5 Hypothetical Health States in Heart Failure Using Time Trade-Off (TTO) and EQ-5D-5L in Korea. Hong SH; Lee JY; Park SK; Nam JH; Song HJ; Park SY; Lee EK Clin Drug Investig; 2018 Aug; 38(8):727-736. PubMed ID: 29804184 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Estimating an EQ-5D-5L Value Set for China. Luo N; Liu G; Li M; Guan H; Jin X; Rand-Hendriksen K Value Health; 2017 Apr; 20(4):662-669. PubMed ID: 28408009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Preparatory study for the revaluation of the EQ-5D tariff: methodology report. Mulhern B; Bansback N; Brazier J; Buckingham K; Cairns J; Devlin N; Dolan P; Hole AR; Kavetsos G; Longworth L; Rowen D; Tsuchiya A Health Technol Assess; 2014 Feb; 18(12):vii-xxvi, 1-191. PubMed ID: 24568945 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Do Chinese have similar health-state preferences? A comparison of mainland Chinese and Singaporean Chinese. Wang P; Li MH; Liu GG; Thumboo J; Luo N Eur J Health Econ; 2015 Nov; 16(8):857-63. PubMed ID: 25260384 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Utility assessment in patients with mental disorders: validity and discriminative ability of the time trade-off method. König HH; Günther OH; Angermeyer MC; Roick C Pharmacoeconomics; 2009; 27(5):405-19. PubMed ID: 19586078 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Interpretation of health and vision utilities in low vision patients. Malkin AG; Goldstein JE; Massof RW Optom Vis Sci; 2012 Mar; 89(3):288-95. PubMed ID: 22227913 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Examination of assumptions in using time tradeoff and standard gamble utilities in individuals with spinal cord injury. Lin MR; Yu WY; Wang SC Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2012 Feb; 93(2):245-52. PubMed ID: 22289233 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Pain quality of life as measured by utilities. Wetherington S; Delong L; Kini S; Veledar E; Schaufele MK; McKenzie-Brown AM; Chen SC Pain Med; 2014 May; 15(5):865-70. PubMed ID: 24716656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Utility assessment among patients with dry eye disease. Schiffman RM; Walt JG; Jacobsen G; Doyle JJ; Lebovics G; Sumner W Ophthalmology; 2003 Jul; 110(7):1412-9. PubMed ID: 12867401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. EQ-5D-5L Bulgarian population norms. Encheva M; Djambazov S; Vekov T; Golicki D Eur J Health Econ; 2020 Nov; 21(8):1169-1178. PubMed ID: 32813084 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. QALY weights for diabetic retinopathy--a comparison of health state valuations with HUI-3, EQ-5D, EQ-VAS, and TTO. Heintz E; Wiréhn AB; Peebo BB; Rosenqvist U; Levin LÅ Value Health; 2012 May; 15(3):475-84. PubMed ID: 22583458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Parallel Valuation: A Direct Comparison of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L Societal Value Sets. Law EH; Pickard AS; Xie F; Walton SM; Lee TA; Schwartz A Med Decis Making; 2018 Nov; 38(8):968-982. PubMed ID: 30403577 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]