217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37450991)
1. Algorithms and heuristics of health technology assessments: A retrospective analysis of factors associated with HTA outcomes for new drugs across seven OECD countries.
Kanavos P; Visintin E; Gentilini A
Soc Sci Med; 2023 Aug; 331():116045. PubMed ID: 37450991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Value assessment of disease-modifying therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: HTA evidence from seven OECD countries.
Visintin E; Tinelli M; Kanavos P
Health Policy; 2019 Feb; 123(2):118-129. PubMed ID: 30227974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Determinants of Managed Entry Agreements in the context of Health Technology Assessment: a comparative analysis of oncology therapies in four countries.
Efthymiadou O; Kanavos P
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2021 Jan; 37():e31. PubMed ID: 33509311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four European countries.
Nicod E
Eur J Health Econ; 2017 Jul; 18(6):715-730. PubMed ID: 27538758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Health technology assessment for cancer medicines across the G7 countries and Oceania: an international, cross-sectional study.
Jenei K; Raymakers AJN; Bayle A; Berger-Thürmel K; Cherla A; Honda K; Jackson CCGA; Karikios D; Trapani D; Berry S; Gyawali B
Lancet Oncol; 2023 Jun; 24(6):624-635. PubMed ID: 37269843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Methods for the comparative evaluation of pharmaceuticals.
Zentner A; Velasco-Garrido M; Busse R
GMS Health Technol Assess; 2005 Nov; 1():Doc09. PubMed ID: 21289930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Dealing with Uncertainty and Accounting for Social Value Judgments in Assessments of Orphan Drugs: Evidence from Four European Countries.
Nicod E; Berg Brigham K; Durand-Zaleski I; Kanavos P
Value Health; 2017; 20(7):919-926. PubMed ID: 28712621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Modelling approaches for histology-independent cancer drugs to inform NICE appraisals: a systematic review and decision-framework.
Murphy P; Glynn D; Dias S; Hodgson R; Claxton L; Beresford L; Cooper K; Tappenden P; Ennis K; Grosso A; Wright K; Cantrell A; Stevenson M; Palmer S
Health Technol Assess; 2021 Dec; 25(76):1-228. PubMed ID: 34990339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Market access for medicines treating rare diseases: Association between specialised processes for orphan medicines and funding recommendations.
Fontrier AM
Soc Sci Med; 2022 Aug; 306():115119. PubMed ID: 35700552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Using health technology assessment to assess the value of new medicines: results of a systematic review and expert consultation across eight European countries.
Angelis A; Lange A; Kanavos P
Eur J Health Econ; 2018 Jan; 19(1):123-152. PubMed ID: 28303438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Informative value of Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) in Health Technology Assessment (HTA).
Brettschneider C; Lühmann D; Raspe H
GMS Health Technol Assess; 2011 Feb; 7():Doc01. PubMed ID: 21468289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. HTA Barriers for Conditional Approval Drugs.
Mills M
Pharmacoeconomics; 2023 May; 41(5):529-545. PubMed ID: 36821044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Health technology assessment report: Computer-assisted Pap test for cervical cancer screening].
Della Palma P; Moresco L; Giorgi Rossi P
Epidemiol Prev; 2012; 36(5 Suppl 3):e1-43. PubMed ID: 23139174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Health technology assessment criteria as drivers of coverage with managed entry agreements: a case study of cancer medicines in four countries.
Efthymiadou O
Eur J Health Econ; 2023 Sep; 24(7):1023-1031. PubMed ID: 36219363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Bridging the gap: Can International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement standard sets align outcomes accepted for regulatory and health technology assessment decision-making of oncology medicines.
Kalf RRJ; Vreman RA; Delnoij DMJ; Bouvy ML; Goettsch WG
Pharmacol Res Perspect; 2021 Apr; 9(2):e00742. PubMed ID: 33749172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment programme.
Claxton K; Ginnelly L; Sculpher M; Philips Z; Palmer S
Health Technol Assess; 2004 Jul; 8(31):1-103, iii. PubMed ID: 15248937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Are current clinical studies on artificial intelligence-based medical devices comprehensive enough to support a full health technology assessment? A systematic review.
Farah L; Davaze-Schneider J; Martin T; Nguyen P; Borget I; Martelli N
Artif Intell Med; 2023 Jun; 140():102547. PubMed ID: 37210155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Case Studies: Factors Influencing Divergent HTA Reimbursement Recommendations in Australia, Canada, England, and Scotland.
Allen N; Walker SR; Liberti L; Salek S
Value Health; 2017 Mar; 20(3):320-328. PubMed ID: 28292476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
