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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

424 related items for PubMed ID: 21635017

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Prucalopride for the treatment of women with chronic constipation in whom standard laxative regimens have failed to provide adequate relief.
    Pennant M, Orlando R, Barton P, Bayliss S, Routh K, Meads C.
    Health Technol Assess; 2011 May; 15 Suppl 1():43-50. PubMed ID: 21609652
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. EQ-5D-5L and SF-6D Utility Measures in Symptomatic benign Thyroid Nodules: Acceptability and Psychometric Evaluation.
    Wong CKH, Lang BHH, Yu HMS, Lam CLK.
    Patient; 2017 Aug; 10(4):447-454. PubMed ID: 28224296
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A comparison of utility measurement using EQ-5D and SF-6D preference-based generic instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
    Salaffi F, Carotti M, Ciapetti A, Gasparini S, Grassi W.
    Clin Exp Rheumatol; 2011 Aug; 29(4):661-71. PubMed ID: 21813061
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Understanding the relationship between the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HAQ and disease activity in inflammatory arthritis.
    Adams R, Walsh C, Veale D, Bresnihan B, FitzGerald O, Barry M.
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2010 Aug; 28(6):477-87. PubMed ID: 20465316
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Exploring the validity of estimating EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values from the health assessment questionnaire in patients with inflammatory arthritis.
    Harrison MJ, Lunt M, Verstappen SM, Watson KD, Bansback NJ, Symmons DP.
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2010 Feb 11; 8():21. PubMed ID: 20149253
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. A systematic review, psychometric analysis and qualitative assessment of generic preference-based measures of health in mental health populations and the estimation of mapping functions from widely used specific measures.
    Brazier J, Connell J, Papaioannou D, Mukuria C, Mulhern B, Peasgood T, Jones ML, Paisley S, O'Cathain A, Barkham M, Knapp M, Byford S, Gilbody S, Parry G.
    Health Technol Assess; 2014 May 11; 18(34):vii-viii, xiii-xxv, 1-188. PubMed ID: 24857402
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Interchangeability of the EQ-5D and the SF-6D, and comparison of their psychometric properties in a spinal postoperative Spanish population.
    Selva-Sevilla C, Ferrara P, Gerónimo-Pardo M.
    Eur J Health Econ; 2020 Jun 11; 21(4):649-662. PubMed ID: 32065301
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Responsiveness and minimally important difference of SF-6D and EQ-5D utility scores for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.
    Harvie HS, Honeycutt AA, Neuwahl SJ, Barber MD, Richter HE, Visco AG, Sung VW, Shepherd JP, Rogers RG, Jakus-Waldman S, Mazloomdoost D, NICHD Pelvic Floor Disorders Network.
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Mar 11; 220(3):265.e1-265.e11. PubMed ID: 30471259
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Estimating the burden of disease in chronic pain with and without neuropathic characteristics: does the choice between the EQ-5D and SF-6D matter?
    Torrance N, Lawson KD, Afolabi E, Bennett MI, Serpell MG, Dunn KM, Smith BH.
    Pain; 2014 Oct 11; 155(10):1996-2004. PubMed ID: 25020004
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Differential Psychometric Properties of EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level and Short-Form 6-Dimension Utility Measures in Low Back Pain.
    Cheung PWH, Wong CKH, Cheung JPY.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2019 Jun 01; 44(11):E679-E686. PubMed ID: 30475342
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. A review of the psychometric properties of generic utility measures in multiple sclerosis.
    Kuspinar A, Mayo NE.
    Pharmacoeconomics; 2014 Aug 01; 32(8):759-73. PubMed ID: 24846760
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modelling and survey.
    Longworth L, Yang Y, Young T, Mulhern B, Hernández Alava M, Mukuria C, Rowen D, Tosh J, Tsuchiya A, Evans P, Devianee Keetharuth A, Brazier J.
    Health Technol Assess; 2014 Feb 01; 18(9):1-224. PubMed ID: 24524660
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population.
    Petrou S, Hockley C.
    Health Econ; 2005 Nov 01; 14(11):1169-89. PubMed ID: 15942981
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Mapping of the Gastrointestinal Short Form Questionnaire (GSF-Q) into EQ-5D-3L and SF-6D in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.
    Monroy M, Ruiz MA, Rejas J, Soto J.
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2018 Sep 10; 16(1):177. PubMed ID: 30200982
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Mapping the EORTC QLQ-C30 to EQ-5D-3L in patients with breast cancer.
    Gray LA, Hernandez Alava M, Wailoo AJ.
    BMC Cancer; 2021 Nov 18; 21(1):1237. PubMed ID: 34794404
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Comparison of generic, condition-specific, and mapped health state utility values for multiple myeloma cancer.
    Rowen D, Young T, Brazier J, Gaugris S.
    Value Health; 2012 Dec 18; 15(8):1059-68. PubMed ID: 23244808
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    Brazier J, Longworth L.
    ; 2011 08 18. PubMed ID: 28481495
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Do generic utility measures capture what is important to the quality of life of people with multiple sclerosis?
    Kuspinar A, Mayo NE.
    Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2013 Apr 25; 11():71. PubMed ID: 23618072
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Mapping between the Roland Morris Questionnaire and generic preference-based measures.
    Khan KA, Madan J, Petrou S, Lamb SE.
    Value Health; 2014 Sep 25; 17(6):686-95. PubMed ID: 25236992
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 22.