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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34738210)

  • 1. How are Child-Specific Utility Instruments Used in Decision Making in Australia? A Review of Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee Public Summary Documents.
    Bailey C; Dalziel K; Cronin P; Devlin N; Viney R;
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2022 Feb; 40(2):157-182. PubMed ID: 34738210
    [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. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Health Technology Assessment in Australia: The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and Medical Services Advisory Committee.
    Kim H; Byrnes J; Goodall S;
    Value Health Reg Issues; 2021 May; 24():6-11. PubMed ID: 33429153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Towards a Transparent, Credible, Evidence-Based Decision-Making Process of New Drug Listing on the Hong Kong Hospital Authority Drug Formulary: Challenges and Suggestions.
    Wong CKH; Wu O; Cheung BMY
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2018 Feb; 16(1):5-14. PubMed ID: 28702874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Bring Out Your Dead: A Review of the Cost Minimisation Approach in Health Technology Assessment Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.
    Tirrell Z; Norman A; Hoyle M; Lybrand S; Parkinson B
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2024 Nov; 42(11):1287-1300. PubMed ID: 39182009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Is the quality of evidence in health technology assessment deteriorating over time? A case study on cancer drugs in Australia.
    Gao Y; Laka M; Merlin T
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2023 May; 39(1):e28. PubMed ID: 37198927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analysis of consumer comments into PBAC decision-making (2014-9).
    Tjeuw E; Wonder MJ
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2022 Feb; 38(1):e18. PubMed ID: 35115073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Decision-makers' preferences for approving new medicines in Wales: a discrete-choice experiment with assessment of external validity.
    Linley WG; Hughes DA
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Apr; 31(4):345-55. PubMed ID: 23516033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Health technology assessment in Australia: a role for clinical registries?
    Scott AM
    Aust Health Rev; 2017 Mar; 41(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 27028134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health.
    Griebsch I; Coast J; Brown J
    Pediatrics; 2005 May; 115(5):e600-14. PubMed ID: 15867026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. What Can We Expect from Value-Based Funding of Medicines? A Retrospective Study.
    Harris A; Li JJ; Yong K
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2016 Apr; 34(4):393-402. PubMed ID: 26610347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.