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: 38103158)

  • 1. Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE): A New Preference-Elicitation Method for Decision Making in Healthcare.
    Boxebeld S; Mouter N; van Exel J
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2024 Mar; 22(2):145-154. PubMed ID: 38103158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Public preferences for the allocation of societal resources over different healthcare purposes.
    Boxebeld S; Geijsen T; Tuit C; Exel JV; Makady A; Maes L; van Agthoven M; Mouter N
    Soc Sci Med; 2024 Jan; 341():116536. PubMed ID: 38176245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Eliciting Preferences in Dentistry with Multiattribute Stated Preference Methods: A Systematic Review.
    Barber S; Pavitt S; Khambay B; Bekker H; Meads D
    JDR Clin Trans Res; 2018 Oct; 3(4):326-335. PubMed ID: 30931788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.
    Ryan M; Scott DA; Reeves C; Bate A; van Teijlingen ER; Russell EM; Napper M; Robb CM
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(5):1-186. PubMed ID: 11262422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Feasibility and Usability of a Ranking Tool to Elicit Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Trigger Finger.
    Shapiro LM; Eppler SL; Kamal RN
    J Hand Surg Am; 2019 Jun; 44(6):480-486.e1. PubMed ID: 30797655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Preferences for public involvement in health service decisions: a comparison between best-worst scaling and trio-wise stated preference elicitation techniques.
    Erdem S; Campbell D
    Eur J Health Econ; 2017 Dec; 18(9):1107-1123. PubMed ID: 27942967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Choice Experiments to Quantify Preferences for Health and Healthcare: State of the Practice.
    Mühlbacher A; Johnson FR
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2016 Jun; 14(3):253-66. PubMed ID: 26992386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Choosing vs. allocating: discrete choice experiments and constant-sum paired comparisons for the elicitation of societal preferences.
    Skedgel CD; Wailoo AJ; Akehurst RL
    Health Expect; 2015 Oct; 18(5):1227-40. PubMed ID: 23758539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Understanding Uptake of Digital Health Products: Methodology Tutorial for a Discrete Choice Experiment Using the Bayesian Efficient Design.
    Szinay D; Cameron R; Naughton F; Whitty JA; Brown J; Jones A
    J Med Internet Res; 2021 Oct; 23(10):e32365. PubMed ID: 34633290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Application of Preference Elicitation Methods in Clinical Trial Design to Quantify Trade-Offs: A Scoping Review.
    Thomas M; Marshall DA; Choudhary D; Bartlett SJ; Sanchez AL; Hazlewood GS
    Patient; 2022 Jul; 15(4):423-434. PubMed ID: 34927216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform the Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines: Are We Ready Yet?
    Vass CM; Payne K
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2017 Sep; 35(9):859-866. PubMed ID: 28536955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Patient preferences versus physicians' judgement: does it make a difference in healthcare decision making?
    Mühlbacher AC; Juhnke C
    Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2013 Jun; 11(3):163-80. PubMed ID: 23529716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Exploring perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform clinical trial design in rheumatology: A qualitative study and OMERACT collaboration.
    Thomas M; Marshall DA; Sanchez AL; Bartlett SJ; Boonen A; Fraenkel L; Proulx L; Voshaar M; Bansback N; Buchbinder R; Guillemin F; Hiligsmann M; Richards DP; Richards P; Shea B; Tugwell P; Falahee M; Hazlewood GS
    Semin Arthritis Rheum; 2023 Feb; 58():152112. PubMed ID: 36372015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Patients' preferences for primary health care - a systematic literature review of discrete choice experiments.
    Kleij KS; Tangermann U; Amelung VE; Krauth C
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2017 Jul; 17(1):476. PubMed ID: 28697796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Constant-sum paired comparisons for eliciting stated preferences: a tutorial.
    Skedgel C; Regier DA
    Patient; 2015 Apr; 8(2):155-63. PubMed ID: 25038741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A systematic review of stated preference studies reporting public preferences for healthcare priority setting.
    Whitty JA; Lancsar E; Rixon K; Golenko X; Ratcliffe J
    Patient; 2014; 7(4):365-86. PubMed ID: 24872225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The choice and preference for public-private health care among urban residents in China: evidence from a discrete choice experiment.
    Tang C; Xu J; Zhang M
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2016 Oct; 16(1):580. PubMed ID: 27756292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Women's preferences for attributes of first-trimester miscarriage management: a stated preference discrete-choice experiment.
    Petrou S; McIntosh E
    Value Health; 2009 Jun; 12(4):551-9. PubMed ID: 18798807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Patient preferences for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a scoping review.
    Joy SM; Little E; Maruthur NM; Purnell TS; Bridges JF
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2013 Oct; 31(10):877-92. PubMed ID: 24081453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.