The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

David Kim to United States

This is a "connection" page, showing publications David Kim has written about United States.
Connection Strength

1.107
  1. An efficient approach to expand equitable access to antiobesity medications: deprescribing after weight loss plateau. Am J Manag Care. 2024 Aug; 30(8):348-350.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.097
  2. Patient-Provider Communication and Access, Use, and Financial Burden of Care. Am J Prev Med. 2024 Nov; 67(5):740-745.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.097
  3. Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Test for Prostate Cancer Screening and Subsequent Health Care Utilization and Spending. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 11 01; 5(11):e2243449.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.086
  4. State-Level Variation In Low-Value Care For Commercially Insured And Medicare Advantage Populations. Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 09; 41(9):1281-1290.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.085
  5. Effect of the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations on Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in a Medicare Advantage Population. Med Care. 2022 12 01; 60(12):888-894.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.085
  6. How Does Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Inform Health Care Decisions? AMA J Ethics. 2021 08 01; 23(8):E639-647.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.079
  7. Do Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Quality Measures Reflect Cost-Effectiveness Evidence? Value Health. 2021 11; 24(11):1586-1591.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.078
  8. An Evidence Review of Low-Value Care Recommendations: Inconsistency and Lack of Economic Evidence Considered. J Gen Intern Med. 2021 11; 36(11):3448-3455.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.077
  9. Crisis into opportunity: can COVID-19 help set a path to improved health care efficiency? Am J Manag Care. 2020 09; 26(9):369-370.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.074
  10. Cost Effectiveness of Nutrition Policies on Processed Meat: Implications for Cancer Burden in the U.S. Am J Prev Med. 2019 11; 57(5):e143-e152.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  11. The influence of time horizon on results of cost-effectiveness analyses. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2017 Dec; 17(6):615-623.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.059
  12. Estimating the Medical Care Costs of Obesity in the United States: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Empirical Analysis. Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug; 19(5):602-13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  13. Out-of-pocket costs for diagnostic testing following abnormal prostate cancer screening among privately insured men. Cancer. 2024 Oct 01; 130(19):3305-3310.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  14. Health and Economic Impacts of Implementing Produce Prescription Programs for Diabetes in the United States: A Microsimulation Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023 08; 12(15):e029215.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  15. What is the cost-effectiveness of menu calorie labelling on reducing obesity-associated cancer burdens? An economic evaluation of a federal policy intervention among 235 million adults in the USA. BMJ Open. 2023 04 18; 13(4):e063614.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  16. Medicare Part D Coverage of Antiobesity Medications - Challenges and Uncertainty Ahead. N Engl J Med. 2023 Mar 16; 388(11):961-963.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  17. Trends and Disparities in Cardiometabolic Health Among U.S. Adults, 1999-2018. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 07 12; 80(2):138-151.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  18. Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nutrition Facts Added-Sugar Labeling and Obesity-Associated Cancer Rates in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 04 01; 4(4):e217501.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  19. Variation in US private health plans' coverage of orphan drugs. Am J Manag Care. 2019 10; 25(10):508-512.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  20. Integrating value of research into NCI Clinical Trials Cooperative Group research review and prioritization: A pilot study. Cancer Med. 2018 09; 7(9):4251-4260.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.