David Meltzer to Prostatic Neoplasms
This is a "connection" page, showing publications David Meltzer has written about Prostatic Neoplasms.
Connection Strength
1.176
-
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: 0.174
-
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: 0.164
-
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: 0.140
-
Extending the validity of the Memorial Anxiety Scale for Prostate Cancer (MAX-PC) at the time of prostate biopsy in a racially-mixed population. Psychooncology. 2007 May; 16(5):493-8.
Score: 0.135
-
Value of information on preference heterogeneity and individualized care. Med Decis Making. 2007 Mar-Apr; 27(2):112-27.
Score: 0.133
-
The role of anxiety in prostate carcinoma: a structured review of the literature. Cancer. 2005 Aug 01; 104(3):467-78.
Score: 0.119
-
Implications of spillover effects within the family for medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 2005 Jul; 24(4):751-73.
Score: 0.117
-
Patterns of prostate cancer treatment by clinical stage and age. Am J Public Health. 2001 Jan; 91(1):126-8.
Score: 0.087
-
African American men significantly underestimate their risk of having prostate cancer at the time of biopsy. Psychooncology. 2013 Feb; 22(2):338-45.
Score: 0.046
-
A linear index for predicting joint health-states utilities from single health-states utilities. Health Econ. 2009 Apr; 18(4):403-19.
Score: 0.038
-
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: 0.022