131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38104371)
1. Making recommendations to subsidize new health technologies in Australia: A qualitative study of decision-makers' perspectives on committee processes.
Sellars M; Carter SM; Lancsar E; Howard K; Coast J
Health Policy; 2024 Jan; 139():104963. PubMed ID: 38104371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Introduction and uptake of new medical technologies in the Australian health care system: a qualitative study.
Gallego G; Casey R; Norman R; Goodall S
Health Policy; 2011 Oct; 102(2-3):152-8. PubMed ID: 21601934
[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. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for health technology assessment: the Queensland Health experience.
Howard S; Scott IA; Ju H; McQueen L; Scuffham PA
Aust Health Rev; 2019 Oct; 43(5):591-599. PubMed ID: 30205873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
Chilcott J; Tappenden P; Rawdin A; Johnson M; Kaltenthaler E; Paisley S; Papaioannou D; Shippam A
Health Technol Assess; 2010 May; 14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. PubMed ID: 20501062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Power relations and contrasting conceptions of evidence in patient-involvement processes used to inform health funding decisions in Australia.
Lopes E; Carter D; Street J
Soc Sci Med; 2015 Jun; 135():84-91. PubMed ID: 25950114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Preferences for engagement in health technology assessment decision-making: a nominal group technique with members of the public.
Wortley S; Tong A; Howard K
BMJ Open; 2016 Feb; 6(2):e010265. PubMed ID: 26832433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. QUALITY OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORTS PREPARED FOR THE MEDICAL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Hua M; Boonstra T; Kelly PJ; Wilson A; Craig JC; Webster AC
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2016 Jan; 32(4):315-323. PubMed ID: 27691988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.
Jardine C; Hrudey S; Shortreed J; Craig L; Krewski D; Furgal C; McColl S
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev; 2003; 6(6):569-720. PubMed ID: 14698953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. An evaluation of methods used in health technology assessments produced for the Medical Services Advisory Committee.
Petherick ES; Villanueva EV; Dumville J; Bryan EJ; Dharmage S
Med J Aust; 2007 Sep; 187(5):289-92. PubMed ID: 17767435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Public preferences for engagement in Health Technology Assessment decision-making: protocol of a mixed methods study.
Wortley S; Tong A; Lancsar E; Salkeld G; Howard K
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2015 Jul; 15():52. PubMed ID: 26166149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A qualitative study on the feasibility and acceptability of institutionalizing health technology assessment in Malawi.
Mfutso-Bengo J; Jeremiah F; Kasende-Chinguwo F; Ng'ambi W; Nkungula N; Kazanga-Chiumia I; Juma M; Chawani M; Chinkhumba J; Twea P; Chirwa E; Langwe K; Manthalu G; Ngwira LG; Nkhoma D; Colbourn T; Revill P; Sculpher M
BMC Health Serv Res; 2023 Apr; 23(1):353. PubMed ID: 37041590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. INTRODUCTION OF INNOVATIVE MEDICAL DEVICES AT FRENCH UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS: AN OVERVIEW OF HOSPITAL-BASED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT INITIATIVES.
Martelli N; Billaux M; Borget I; Pineau J; Prognon P; van den Brink H
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2015 Jan; 31(1-2):12-8. PubMed ID: 25991072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Involving patients in health technology funding decisions: stakeholder perspectives on processes used in Australia.
Lopes E; Street J; Carter D; Merlin T
Health Expect; 2016 Apr; 19(2):331-44. PubMed ID: 25703958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Review of a decision by the Medical Services Advisory Committee based on health technology assessment of an emerging technology: the case for remotely assisted radical prostatectomy.
O'Malley SP; Jordan E
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2007; 23(2):286-91. PubMed ID: 17493316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
