Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 17

1.

Making policy decisions about population screening for breast cancer: the role of citizens' deliberation.

Paul C, Nicholls R, Priest P, McGee R.

Health Policy. 2008 Mar;85(3):314-20. Epub 2007 Oct 10.

PMID:
17931738
2.

The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review.

Street J, Duszynski K, Krawczyk S, Braunack-Mayer A.

Soc Sci Med. 2014 May;109:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.005. Epub 2014 Mar 6. Review.

3.

From passive subject to active agent: the potential of Citizens' Juries for nursing research.

Iredale R, Longley M.

Nurse Educ Today. 2007 Oct;27(7):788-95. Epub 2006 Dec 8. Review.

PMID:
17157967
4.

[Science and deliberation].

Ravazzi S.

Epidemiol Prev. 2008 Nov-Dec;32(6):319-24. Review. Italian.

5.

Engaging the public in healthcare decision-making: quantifying preferences for healthcare through citizens' juries.

Scuffham PA, Ratcliffe J, Kendall E, Burton P, Wilson A, Chalkidou K, Littlejohns P, Whitty JA.

BMJ Open. 2014 May 2;4(5):e005437. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005437. Review.

6.

Which public and why deliberate?--A scoping review of public deliberation in public health and health policy research.

Degeling C, Carter SM, Rychetnik L.

Soc Sci Med. 2015 Apr;131:114-21. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.03.009. Epub 2015 Mar 6. Review.

PMID:
25770463
8.

NIH Consensus Statement. Breast cancer screening for women ages 40-49.

[No authors listed]

NIH Consens Statement. 1997 Jan 21-23;15(1):1-35. Review.

PMID:
9267441
9.

Do consumer voices in health-care citizens' juries matter?

Krinks R, Kendall E, Whitty JA, Scuffham PA.

Health Expect. 2016 Oct;19(5):1015-22. doi: 10.1111/hex.12397. Epub 2015 Sep 28. Review.

11.

Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes.

Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Smith P, Martin E, Gauvin FP.

Soc Sci Med. 2003 Jul;57(2):239-51. Review.

PMID:
12765705
12.

Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests.

Edwards AG, Evans R, Dundon J, Haigh S, Hood K, Elwyn GJ.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18;(4):CD001865. Review. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2:CD001865.

PMID:
17054144
13.

Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer.

Ringash J; Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

CMAJ. 2001 Feb 20;164(4):469-76. Review. Erratum in: CMAJ 2001 Mar 20;164(6):753.

14.

Mammography screening. Benefits, harms, and informed choice.

Jørgensen KJ.

Dan Med J. 2013 Apr;60(4):B4614. Review.

PMID:
23651722
15.

Breast cancer screening for women aged 40 to 49 years--what does the evidence mean for New Zealand?

Baker S, Wall M, Bloomfield A.

N Z Med J. 2005 Aug 26;118(1221):U1628. Review.

PMID:
16138166
16.

What is the most appropriate breast-cancer screening interval for women aged 45 to 49 years in New Zealand?

Baker S, Wall M, Bloomfield A.

N Z Med J. 2005 Aug 26;118(1221):U1636. Review.

PMID:
16138174
17.

Citizen deliberation in setting health-care priorities.

Murphy NJ.

Health Expect. 2005 Jun;8(2):172-81. Review.

Supplemental Content

Support Center