148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35115073)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Appraisals by Health Technology Assessment Agencies of Economic Evaluations Submitted as Part of Reimbursement Dossiers for Oncology Treatments: Evidence from Canada, the UK, and Australia.
Ball G; Levine MAH; Thabane L; Tarride JE
Curr Oncol; 2022 Oct; 29(10):7624-7636. PubMed ID: 36290879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
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. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
