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.
149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39340750)
1. Comparison of four approaches in eliciting health state utilities with SF-6Dv2. Ameri H; Poder TG Eur J Health Econ; 2024 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 39340750 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A novel approach for health state valuation: Multiple bounded dichotomous choice compared to the traditional standard gamble. Poder TG; Ameri H Soc Sci Med; 2024 Sep; 357():117173. PubMed ID: 39116700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Do Discrete Choice Experiments Approaches Perform Better Than Time Trade-Off in Eliciting Health State Utilities? Evidence From SF-6Dv2 in China. Xie S; Wu J; He X; Chen G; Brazier JE Value Health; 2020 Oct; 23(10):1391-1399. PubMed ID: 33032784 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Valuation of SF-6Dv2 Health States in China Using Time Trade-off and Discrete-Choice Experiment with a Duration Dimension. Wu J; Xie S; He X; Chen G; Bai G; Feng D; Hu M; Jiang J; Wang X; Wu H; Wu Q; Brazier JE Pharmacoeconomics; 2021 May; 39(5):521-535. PubMed ID: 33598860 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Discrete choice experiment with duration versus time trade-off: a comparison of test-retest reliability of health utility elicitation approaches in SF-6Dv2 valuation. Xie S; Wu J; Chen G Qual Life Res; 2022 Sep; 31(9):2791-2803. PubMed ID: 35610406 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Valuing the SF-6Dv2 in the capital of Iran using a discrete choice experiment with duration. Daroudi R; Zeraati H; Poder TG; Norman R; Olyaeemanesh A; Sari AA; Ameri H Qual Life Res; 2024 Jul; 33(7):1853-1863. PubMed ID: 38630166 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Valuing the SF-6Dv2 Classification System in the United Kingdom Using a Discrete-choice Experiment With Duration. Mulhern BJ; Bansback N; Norman R; Brazier J; Med Care; 2020 Jun; 58(6):566-573. PubMed ID: 32221100 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Valuing Child Health Utility 9D health states with a young adolescent sample: a feasibility study to compare best-worst scaling discrete-choice experiment, standard gamble and time trade-off methods. Ratcliffe J; Couzner L; Flynn T; Sawyer M; Stevens K; Brazier J; Burgess L Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2011; 9(1):15-27. PubMed ID: 21033766 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Eliciting SF-6Dv2 health state utilities using an anchored best-worst scaling technique. Osman AMY; Wu J; He X; Chen G Soc Sci Med; 2021 Jun; 279():114018. PubMed ID: 33993008 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. How Should Discrete Choice Experiments with Duration Choice Sets Be Presented for the Valuation of Health States? Mulhern B; Norman R; Shah K; Bansback N; Longworth L; Viney R Med Decis Making; 2018 Apr; 38(3):306-318. PubMed ID: 29084472 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparing the Self-Reported Acceptability of Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling: An Empirical Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Li F; Liu S; Gu Y; Li S; Tao Y; Wei Y; Chen Y Patient Prefer Adherence; 2024; 18():1803-1813. PubMed ID: 39229369 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Valuing SF-6Dv2 in Australia Using an International Protocol. Mulhern B; Norman R; Brazier J Pharmacoeconomics; 2021 Oct; 39(10):1151-1162. PubMed ID: 34250578 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Adolescent valuation of CARIES-QC-U: a child-centred preference-based measure of dental caries. Rogers HJ; Sagabiel J; Marshman Z; Rodd HD; Rowen D Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2022 Feb; 20(1):18. PubMed ID: 35115013 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Whose Time Trade-Off Should Be Used? Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Latent Utilities in Health State Valuation. Xie S; Wu J; Xie F Value Health; 2023 Sep; 26(9):1405-1412. PubMed ID: 37285916 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Creating an SF-6Dv2 social value set for New Zealand. Sullivan T; McCarty G; Ombler F; Turner R; Mulhern B; Hansen P Soc Sci Med; 2024 Aug; 354():117073. PubMed ID: 38959817 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Eliciting preferences to the EQ-5D-5L health states: discrete choice experiment or multiprofile case of best-worst scaling? Xie F; Pullenayegum E; Gaebel K; Oppe M; Krabbe PF Eur J Health Econ; 2014 Apr; 15(3):281-8. PubMed ID: 23553075 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Examining the Feasibility and Acceptability of Valuing the Arabic Version of SF-6D in a Lebanese Population. Kharroubi SA; Beyh Y; Harake MDE; Dawoud D; Rowen D; Brazier J Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Feb; 17(3):. PubMed ID: 32041284 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparative performance and mapping algorithms between EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 among the Chinese general population. Xie S; Wu J; Chen G Eur J Health Econ; 2024 Feb; 25(1):7-19. PubMed ID: 36709458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Valuing Chinese medicine quality of life-11 dimensions (CQ-11D) health states using a discrete choice experiment with survival duration (DCE Zhu W; Zhang M; Pan J; Shi L; Gao H; Xie S Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2023 Aug; 21(1):99. PubMed ID: 37612664 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]