127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36543249)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Governments Need Better Guidance to Maximise Value for Money: The Case of Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.
Carter D; Vogan A; Haji Ali Afzali H
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2016 Aug; 14(4):401-407. PubMed ID: 26818196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. 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]
25. Uptake of new medicines in New Zealand: evidence of a waiting list.
Barber JM; Sheehy KP
N Z Med J; 2015 Apr; 128(1412):10-20. PubMed ID: 25899488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for drugs in Australia: a retrospective analysis 1994-2004.
Harris AH; Hill SR; Chin G; Li JJ; Walkom E
Med Decis Making; 2008; 28(5):713-22. PubMed ID: 18378939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. What impact does 'conventional' economic evaluation have on patient access to new orphan medicines? A comparative study of their reimbursement in Australia (2005-2012).
Wonder M; Chin G
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 15(5):843-50. PubMed ID: 25938794
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. 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]
29. Do different clinical evidence bases lead to discordant health-technology assessment decisions? An in-depth case series across three jurisdictions.
Spinner DS; Birt J; Walter JW; Bowman L; Mauskopf J; Drummond MF; Copley-Merriman C
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res; 2013; 5():69-85. PubMed ID: 23403392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Uncertainty tolerance among experts involved in drug reimbursement recommendations: Qualitative evidence from HTA committees in Canada and Poland.
Wranik WD; Gambold L; Peacock S
Health Policy; 2021 Mar; 125(3):307-319. PubMed ID: 33388158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Economic analysis as an aid to subsidisation decisions: the development of Australian guidelines for pharmaceuticals.
Henry D
Pharmacoeconomics; 1992 Jan; 1(1):54-67. PubMed ID: 10147039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Australian managed entry scheme: a new manageable process for the reimbursement of new medicines?
Wonder M; Backhouse ME; Sullivan SD
Value Health; 2012 May; 15(3):586-90. PubMed ID: 22583471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. A systematic review of economic evaluations in second and later lines of therapy for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.
Jäkel A; Plested M; Dharamshi K; Modha R; Bridge S; Johns A
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2013 Feb; 11(1):27-43. PubMed ID: 23329379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Revealed and Stated Preferences of Decision Makers for Priority Setting in Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review.
Ghijben P; Gu Y; Lancsar E; Zavarsek S
Pharmacoeconomics; 2018 Mar; 36(3):323-340. PubMed ID: 29124632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A will and a way to fund medicines for rare diseases: the story of human growth hormone replacement for adults with growth hormone deficiency.
Lipworth W; Ambler G; Burt MG; Fairchild J; Inder WJ; Werther G; Ho K
Intern Med J; 2018 Aug; 48(8):999-1002. PubMed ID: 30133980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Same drugs, valued differently? Comparing comparators and methods used in reimbursement recommendations in Australia, Canada, and Korea.
Bae G; Bae EY; Bae S
Health Policy; 2015 May; 119(5):577-87. PubMed ID: 25666339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. The evaluation and use of economic evidence to inform cancer drug reimbursement decisions in Canada.
Yong JH; Beca J; Hoch JS
Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Mar; 31(3):229-36. PubMed ID: 23322588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Transparency in pricing arrangements for medicines listed on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
Robertson J; Walkom EJ; Henry DA
Aust Health Rev; 2009 May; 33(2):192-9. PubMed ID: 19563308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
