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 *

93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8893113)

  • 1. Retrospective drug utilization review software systems: perspectives of state Medicaid DUR directors.
    Armstrong EP; Proteau D
    Ann Pharmacother; 1996 Oct; 30(10):1088-91. PubMed ID: 8893113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effectiveness of a Retrospective Drug Utilization Review on Potentially Unsafe Opioid and Central Nervous System Combination Therapy.
    Qureshi N; Wesolowicz LA; Liu CM; Tungol Lin A
    J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2015 Oct; 21(10):938-44. PubMed ID: 26402392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Current status of prospective drug utilization review.
    Fulda TR; Lyles A; Pugh MC; Christensen DB
    J Manag Care Pharm; 2004; 10(5):433-41. PubMed ID: 15369426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Drug utilization review: mechanisms to improve its effectiveness and broaden its scope. The U.S. Pharmacopeia Drug Utilization Review Advisory Panel.
    J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash); 2000; 40(4):538-45. PubMed ID: 10932464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Drug utilization review in ambulatory settings: state of the science and directions for outcomes research.
    Lipton HL; Bird JA
    Med Care; 1993 Dec; 31(12):1069-82. PubMed ID: 8246637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Drug utilization review of sedative/hypnotic agents in Texas Medicaid patients. Texas Medicaid Vendor Drug Program Drug Utilization Review Board.
    Seltzer JK; Kurt TL; Knodel LC; Dean B; Burch C
    J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash); 2000; 40(4):495-9. PubMed ID: 10932458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing the Medicaid Prospective Drug Utilization Review Program Cost-Savings Methods Used by State Agencies in 2015 and 2016.
    Prada SI; Loaiza JS
    Am Health Drug Benefits; 2019 Feb; 12(1):7-12. PubMed ID: 30972148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparing the Medicaid Retrospective Drug Utilization Review Program Cost-Savings Methods Used by State Agencies.
    Prada SI
    Am Health Drug Benefits; 2017 Dec; 10(9):477-482. PubMed ID: 29403573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Pharmacists' reactions to the Wisconsin Medicaid drug-use review program.
    Brown CM; Lipowski EE
    Am J Hosp Pharm; 1993 Sep; 50(9):1898-902. PubMed ID: 7907839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Medicaid drug utilization review annual reports for federal fiscal year 1999: looking back to move forward.
    Fulda TR; Collins T; Kuhle J; Devereaux DS; Zuckerman IH
    J Am Pharm Assoc (2003); 2004; 44(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 14965156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Retrospective drug utilization review and the behavior of Medicaid prescribers: an empirical marginal analysis.
    Guo JJ; Gibson JT; Hancock GR; Barker KN
    Clin Ther; 1995; 17(6):1174-87. PubMed ID: 8750408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prevalence of drug-related problems and cost-savings opportunities in medicaid high utilizers identified by a pharmacist-run drug regimen review center.
    LaFleur J; McBeth C; Gunning K; Oderda L; Steinvoort C; Oderda GM
    J Manag Care Pharm; 2006 Oct; 12(8):677-85. PubMed ID: 17269846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Medicaid program; drug use review program and electronic claims management system for outpatient drug claims--HCFA. Final rule.
    Fed Regist; 1994 Sep; 59(184):48811-25. PubMed ID: 10137645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The cost effectiveness of drug utilisation review in an outpatient setting.
    Kreling DH; Mott DA
    Pharmacoeconomics; 1993 Dec; 4(6):414-36. PubMed ID: 10146909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Drug utilization review using a Medicaid claims database.
    Sena MM; Pashko S
    Clin Ther; 1993; 15(5):900-4. PubMed ID: 8269457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Michigan drug utilization review and OBRA 90.
    Sandusky M
    Mich Med; 1993 Apr; 92(4):38-9. PubMed ID: 8231930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of a DUR intervention: a case study of histamine antagonists.
    Zimmerman DR; Collins TM; Lipowski EE; Sainfort F
    Inquiry; 1994; 31(1):89-101. PubMed ID: 7909535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The ineffectiveness of retrospective drug utilization review.
    Hennessy S; Strom BL
    LDI Issue Brief; 2003 Sep; 9(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 14577443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Retrospective drug utilization review: incidence of clinically relevant potential drug-drug interactions in a large ambulatory population.
    Peng CC; Glassman PA; Marks IR; Fowler C; Castiglione B; Good CB
    J Manag Care Pharm; 2003; 9(6):513-22. PubMed ID: 14664659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of the introduction of a nationwide DUR system where local DUR systems are operating--The Korean experience.
    Yang JH; Kim M; Park YT; Lee EK; Jung CY; Kim S
    Int J Med Inform; 2015 Nov; 84(11):912-9. PubMed ID: 26363001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.