Advertisement
Clinical Therapeutics
Advanced searchSave search
Editorial| Volume 21, ISSUE 9, P1604, September 1999

Editorial comment

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(00)80014-4
Editorial comment
Previous ArticleAn economic analysis of antimicrobial prophylaxis against urinary tract infection in patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate
Next ArticleQuality-adjusted life-years and other health indices: A comparative analysis
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      References

        • Robinson A
        • Dolan P
        • Williams A
        Valuing health status using VAS and TTO: What lies behind the numbers?.
        Soc Sci Med. 1997; 45: 1289-1297
        • Glick HA
        • Polsky D
        • Willke RJ
        • Schulman KA
        A comparison of preference assessment in-struments used in a clinical trial: Responses to the visual analog scale from the EuroQol EQ-5D and the Health Utilit.
        Med Decis Making. 1999; 19: 265-275
        • Torrance GW
        • Furlong W
        • Feeny D
        • Boyle M
        Multi-attribute preference functions. Health Util-ities Index.
        Pharmacoeconomics. 1995; 7: 503-520
        • Kaplan RM
        • Feeny D
        • Revicki DA
        Methods for assessing relative importance in preference based outcome measures.
        Qual Life Res. 1993; 2: 467-475

      Article info

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(00)80014-4

      Copyright

      © 1999 Published by Elsevier Inc.

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect

      The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the Cookie Preference Center for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties.


      RELX