Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 384

1.

Prospective observational studies to assess comparative effectiveness: the ISPOR good research practices task force report.

Berger ML, Dreyer N, Anderson F, Towse A, Sedrakyan A, Normand SL.

Value Health. 2012 Mar-Apr;15(2):217-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.010.

PMID:
22433752
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
3.
4.

The ISPOR Good Practices for Quality Improvement of Cost-Effectiveness Research Task Force Report.

McGhan WF, Al M, Doshi JA, Kamae I, Marx SE, Rindress D.

Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1086-99. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00605.x. Epub 2009 Sep 10.

PMID:
19744291
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
5.

Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR Task Force on good research practices--budget impact analysis.

Mauskopf JA, Sullivan SD, Annemans L, Caro J, Mullins CD, Nuijten M, Orlewska E, Watkins J, Trueman P.

Value Health. 2007 Sep-Oct;10(5):336-47.

PMID:
17888098
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
6.

Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report.

Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, Lundy JJ, Sloan JA, Revicki DA, Lenderking WR, Cella D, Basch E; ISPOR ePRO Task Force.

Value Health. 2009 Jun;12(4):419-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00470.x. Epub 2008 Nov 11.

PMID:
19900250
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
7.

Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report.

Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, Brown R, Buxton M, Chawla A, Cook J, Glick H, Liljas B, Petitti D, Reed S.

Value Health. 2005 Sep-Oct;8(5):521-33. Review.

PMID:
16176491
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
8.
9.

Comparative effectiveness research: guidelines for good practices are just the beginning.

Johnson ML, Chitnis AS.

Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011 Feb;11(1):51-7. doi: 10.1586/erp.10.93.

PMID:
21351858
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
10.

Good research practices for measuring drug costs in cost effectiveness analyses: issues and recommendations: the ISPOR Drug Cost Task Force report--Part I.

Hay JW, Smeeding J, Carroll NV, Drummond M, Garrison LP, Mansley EC, Mullins CD, Mycka JM, Seal B, Shi L.

Value Health. 2010 Jan-Feb;13(1):3-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00663.x. Epub 2009 Oct 28.

PMID:
19874571
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
12.

Some methodological points to consider when performing systematic reviews in comparative effectiveness research.

Berlin JA, Cepeda MS.

Clin Trials. 2012 Feb;9(1):27-34. doi: 10.1177/1740774511427062. Epub 2011 Nov 2.

PMID:
22049086
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
13.

Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke.

Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, Roberts H, Tomsick T, Connors B, Barr J, Dillon W, Warach S, Broderick J, Tilley B, Sacks D; Technology Assessment Committee of the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology; Technology Assessment Committee of the Society of Interventional Radiology.

Stroke. 2003 Aug;34(8):e109-37. Epub 2003 Jul 17. Erratum in: Stroke. 2003 Nov;34(11):2774.

PMID:
12869717
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free Article
14.

Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements-good practices for design, implementation, and evaluation: report of the ISPOR good practices for performance-based risk-sharing arrangements task force.

Garrison LP Jr, Towse A, Briggs A, de Pouvourville G, Grueger J, Mohr PE, Severens JL, Siviero P, Sleeper M.

Value Health. 2013 Jul-Aug;16(5):703-19. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.011. Epub 2013 Jul 19.

PMID:
23947963
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
15.

Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force.

Sullivan SD, Mauskopf JA, Augustovski F, Jaime Caro J, Lee KM, Minchin M, Orlewska E, Penna P, Rodriguez Barrios JM, Shau WY.

Value Health. 2014 Jan-Feb;17(1):5-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.08.2291. Epub 2013 Dec 13.

PMID:
24438712
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
16.

Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment.

Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Golder S, Riemsma R, Woolacoot N, Glanville J.

Health Technol Assess. 2004 Sep;8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158. Review.

PMID:
15361314
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free Article
17.

Generating evidence for comparative effectiveness research using more pragmatic randomized controlled trials.

Mullins CD, Whicher D, Reese ES, Tunis S.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):969-76. doi: 10.2165/11536160-000000000-00000.

PMID:
20831305
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
18.

The GRACE checklist for rating the quality of observational studies of comparative effectiveness: a tale of hope and caution.

Dreyer NA, Velentgas P, Westrich K, Dubois R.

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2014 Mar;20(3):301-8.

PMID:
24564810
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free Article
19.

A questionnaire to assess the relevance and credibility of observational studies to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report.

Berger ML, Martin BC, Husereau D, Worley K, Allen JD, Yang W, Quon NC, Mullins CD, Kahler KH, Crown W.

Value Health. 2014 Mar;17(2):143-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.12.011. Erratum in: Value Health. 2014 Jun;17(4):489.

PMID:
24636373
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
20.

Methodological challenges of comparative effectiveness research in pain: implications for investigators, clinicians, and policy makers.

Bellows BK, Biskupiak J.

J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2011;25(3):267-74. doi: 10.3109/15360288.2011.599482.

PMID:
21882980
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk