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 *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33517512)

  • 21. NICE's use of cost effectiveness as an exemplar of a deliberative process.
    Culyer AJ
    Health Econ Policy Law; 2006 Jul; 1(Pt 3):299-318. PubMed ID: 18634698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Views of Directors of Public Health about NICE Appraisal Guidance: results of a postal survey. National Institute for Clinical Excellence.
    Davies E; Littlejohns P
    J Public Health Med; 2002 Dec; 24(4):319-25. PubMed ID: 12546211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Decision making in NICE single technological appraisals: How does NICE incorporate patient perspectives?
    Hashem F; Calnan MW; Brown PR
    Health Expect; 2018 Feb; 21(1):128-137. PubMed ID: 28686809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Public Reasoning and Health-Care Priority Setting: The Case of NICE.
    Rumbold B; Weale A; Rid A; Wilson J; Littlejohns P
    Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2017; 27(1):107-134. PubMed ID: 28366905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Flexibility in assessment of rare disease technologies via NICE's single technology appraisal route: a thematic analysis.
    Hale G; Morris J; Barker-Yip J
    J Comp Eff Res; 2023 Nov; 12(11):e230093. PubMed ID: 37724717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Patients' views of explicit rationing: what are the implications for health service decision-making?
    Devlin N; Appleby J; Parkin D
    J Health Serv Res Policy; 2003 Jul; 8(3):183-6. PubMed ID: 12869346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Recent amendments to NICE's value-based assessment of health technologies: implicitly inequitable?
    Paulden M
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2017 Jun; 17(3):239-242. PubMed ID: 28490259
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The impact of rarity in NICE's health technology appraisals.
    Clarke S; Ellis M; Brownrigg J
    Orphanet J Rare Dis; 2021 May; 16(1):218. PubMed ID: 33985575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Clinical Guidelines: A NICE Way to Introduce Cost-Effectiveness Considerations?
    Drummond M
    Value Health; 2016; 19(5):525-30. PubMed ID: 27565268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. At the center of health care policy making: the use of health technology assessment at NICE.
    Stevens AJ; Longson C
    Med Decis Making; 2013 Apr; 33(3):320-4. PubMed ID: 23519880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. NICE's selective application of differential discounting: ambiguous, inconsistent, and unjustified.
    O'Mahony JF; Paulden M
    Value Health; 2014 Jul; 17(5):493-6. PubMed ID: 25128041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis.
    Devlin N; Parkin D
    Health Econ; 2004 May; 13(5):437-52. PubMed ID: 15127424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Can the NICE "end-of-life premium" be given a coherent ethical justification?
    Cookson R
    J Health Polit Policy Law; 2013 Dec; 38(6):1129-48. PubMed ID: 23974470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Incorporating equity in economic evaluations: a multi-attribute equity state approach.
    Round J; Paulden M
    Eur J Health Econ; 2018 May; 19(4):489-498. PubMed ID: 28573333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Azacitidine for Treating Acute Myeloid Leukaemia with More Than 30 % Bone Marrow Blasts: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Single Technology Appraisal.
    Tikhonova IA; Hoyle MW; Snowsill TM; Cooper C; Varley-Campbell JL; Rudin CE; Mujica Mota RE
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2017 Mar; 35(3):363-373. PubMed ID: 27752999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Tisagenlecleucel for the Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory B-cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia in People Aged up to 25 Years: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.
    Walton M; Sharif S; Simmonds M; Claxton L; Hodgson R
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2019 Oct; 37(10):1209-1217. PubMed ID: 30982165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Exorcising the positivist ghost in the priority-setting machine: NICE and the demise of the 'social value judgement'.
    Charlton V; Weale A
    Health Econ Policy Law; 2021 Oct; 16(4):505-511. PubMed ID: 33568251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Opportunity costs and local health service spending decisions: a qualitative study from Wales.
    Karlsberg Schaffer S; Sussex J; Hughes D; Devlin N
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2016 Mar; 16():103. PubMed ID: 27012523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Cost-effectiveness modeling for neuropathic pain treatments: investigating the relative importance of parameters using an open-source model.
    Hirst M; Bending MW; Baio G; Yesufu-Udechuku A; Dunlop WCN
    J Med Econ; 2018 Sep; 21(9):930-935. PubMed ID: 29882452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Willingness to pay for new medicines: a step towards narrowing the gap between NICE and IQWiG.
    Gandjour A
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2020 Apr; 20(1):343. PubMed ID: 32321496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.