David Meltzer to Quality-Adjusted Life Years
This is a "connection" page, showing publications David Meltzer has written about Quality-Adjusted Life Years.
Connection Strength
1.612
-
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: 0.177
-
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: 0.169
-
Value of hospital resources for effective pressure injury prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMJ Qual Saf. 2019 02; 28(2):132-141.
Score: 0.156
-
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: 0.152
-
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: 0.138
-
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: 0.092
-
A linear index for predicting joint health-states utilities from single health-states utilities. Health Econ. 2009 Apr; 18(4):403-19.
Score: 0.082
-
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: 0.076
-
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: 0.074
-
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: 0.074
-
Value of information on preference heterogeneity and individualized care. Med Decis Making. 2007 Mar-Apr; 27(2):112-27.
Score: 0.071
-
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: 0.065
-
Implications of spillover effects within the family for medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 2005 Jul; 24(4):751-73.
Score: 0.062
-
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: 0.040
-
Some reflections on cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 1998 Feb; 7(1):1-7.
Score: 0.038
-
Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ. 1997 Feb; 16(1):33-64.
Score: 0.035
-
Future Costs, Fixed Healthcare Budgets, and the Decision Rules of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Health Econ. 2016 Feb; 25(2):237-48.
Score: 0.030
-
Impact of delaying blood pressure control in patients with Type 2 diabetes: results of a decision analysis. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun; 27(6):640-6.
Score: 0.025
-
The cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2010 Jun; 33(6):1269-74.
Score: 0.022
-
Illustrating the impact of including future costs in economic evaluations: an application to end-stage renal disease care. Health Econ. 2003 Nov; 12(11):949-58.
Score: 0.014
-
Does cost-effectiveness analysis make a difference? Lessons from Pap smears. Symposium. Med Decis Making. 2001 Jul-Aug; 21(4):307-23.
Score: 0.012
-
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: 0.009