David Meltzer to Cost-Benefit Analysis
This is a "connection" page, showing publications David Meltzer has written about Cost-Benefit Analysis.
Connection Strength
3.141
-
Measuring the Cost of Quality Measurement: A Missing Link in Quality Strategy. JAMA. 2017 Oct 03; 318(13):1219-1220.
Score: 0.443
-
Response to "Future costs and the future of cost-effectiveness analysis". J Health Econ. 2008 Jul; 27(4):822-825.
Score: 0.230
-
Value of information on preference heterogeneity and individualized care. Med Decis Making. 2007 Mar-Apr; 27(2):112-27.
Score: 0.212
-
Implications of spillover effects within the family for medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 2005 Jul; 24(4):751-73.
Score: 0.187
-
Addressing uncertainty in medical cost-effectiveness analysis implications of expected utility maximization for methods to perform sensitivity analysis and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to set priorities for medical research. J Health Econ. 2001 Jan; 20(1):109-29.
Score: 0.139
-
Inconsistencies in the "societal perspective" on costs of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Med Decis Making. 1999 Oct-Dec; 19(4):371-7.
Score: 0.127
-
Future unrelated medical costs need to be considered in cost effectiveness analysis. Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Feb; 20(1):1-5.
Score: 0.121
-
Future Directions for Cost-effectiveness Analyses in Health and Medicine. Med Decis Making. 2018 10; 38(7):767-777.
Score: 0.119
-
Value of hospital resources for effective pressure injury prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 02; 28(2):132-141.
Score: 0.117
-
Decision Criterion and Value of Information Analysis: Optimal Aspirin Dosage for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events. Med Decis Making. 2018 05; 38(4):427-438.
Score: 0.114
-
Some reflections on cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 1998 Feb; 7(1):1-7.
Score: 0.113
-
Should cost effectiveness analyses for NICE always consider future unrelated medical costs? BMJ. 2017 11 10; 359:j5096.
Score: 0.111
-
Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 1997 Feb; 16(1):33-64.
Score: 0.106
-
Individualized cost-effectiveness analysis of patient-centered care: a case series of hospitalized patient preferences departing from practice-based guidelines. J Med Econ. 2017 Mar; 20(3):288-296.
Score: 0.104
-
Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 2016 Sep 13; 316(10):1093-103.
Score: 0.103
-
Future Costs, Fixed Healthcare Budgets, and the Decision Rules of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Health Econ. 2016 Feb; 25(2):237-48.
Score: 0.091
-
The prevalence, correlates, and impact of logically inconsistent preferences in utility assessments for joint health states in prostate cancer. Med Care. 2011 Jan; 49(1):59-66.
Score: 0.069
-
Cost-effectiveness analysis in oncology. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2010 Sep; 8(9):589-90.
Score: 0.068
-
A time tradeoff method for eliciting partner's quality of life due to patient's health states in prostate cancer. Med Decis Making. 2010 May-Jun; 30(3):355-65.
Score: 0.066
-
Upper versus lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a direct comparison of clinical presentation, outcomes, and resource utilization. J Hosp Med. 2010 Mar; 5(3):141-7.
Score: 0.065
-
Comparative effectiveness research for antipsychotic medications: how much is enough? Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Sep-Oct; 28(5):w794-808.
Score: 0.063
-
Predicting utility ratings for joint health States from single health States in prostate cancer: empirical testing of 3 alternative theories. Med Decis Making. 2008 Jan-Feb; 28(1):102-12.
Score: 0.056
-
The impact of patient preferences on the cost-effectiveness of intensive glucose control in older patients with new-onset diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006 Feb; 29(2):259-64.
Score: 0.049
-
Does cost-effectiveness analysis make a difference? Lessons from Pap smears. Symposium. Med Decis Making. 2001 Jul-Aug; 21(4):307-23.
Score: 0.036
-
Hospitalists and the doctor-patient relationship. J Legal Stud. 2001 Jun; 30(2):589-606.
Score: 0.036
-
Effect of future costs on cost-effectiveness of medical interventions among young adults: the example of intensive therapy for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Med Care. 2000 Jun; 38(6):679-85.
Score: 0.033
-
Perspective and the measurement of costs and benefits for cost-effectiveness analysis in schizophrenia. J Clin Psychiatry. 1999; 60 Suppl 3:32-5; discussion 36-7.
Score: 0.030
-
Cost-Effectiveness of Mitral Valve Repair Versus Replacement for Severe Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial From the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 11 14; 11(11):e004466.
Score: 0.030
-
Health utilities for children and adults with type 1 diabetes. Med Care. 2011 Oct; 49(10):924-31.
Score: 0.018
-
Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Sep; 12(10):933-80.
Score: 0.018
-
The cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2010 Jun; 33(6):1269-74.
Score: 0.016
-
What does the value of modern medicine say about the $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year decision rule? Med Care. 2008 Apr; 46(4):349-56.
Score: 0.014
-
Use of cost-effectiveness analysis to determine inventory size for a national cord blood bank. Med Decis Making. 2008 Mar-Apr; 28(2):243-53.
Score: 0.014
-
The cost-effectiveness of improving diabetes care in U.S. federally qualified community health centers. Health Serv Res. 2007 Dec; 42(6 Pt 1):2174-93; discussion 2294-323.
Score: 0.014
-
Incorporating future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis: implications for the cost-effectiveness of the treatment of hypertension. Med Decis Making. 1997 Oct-Dec; 17(4):382-9.
Score: 0.007