We are pleased to see the response by Brazier and McCabe (2007) to our paper (Parkin and Devlin, 2006), as it seems to concur with the spirit in which we wrote it; their response, like our paper, supports a wider research agenda on health state valuation than the current consensus advocates. They al
β¦ LIBER β¦
Vegetations in endocarditis: big is bad, but is there more to it?
β Scribed by Christopher H. Cabell; Vance G. Fowler Jr
- Book ID
- 117008704
- Publisher
- Elsevier Science
- Year
- 2003
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 55 KB
- Volume
- 146
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1097-6744
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
π SIMILAR VOLUMES
βIs there a case for using visual analog
β
David Parkin; Nancy Devlin
π
Article
π
2007
π
John Wiley and Sons
π
English
β 78 KB
Revascularization of coronary atheroscle
β
John L. Petersen; Robert A. Harrington
π
Article
π
2005
π
Elsevier Science
π
English
β 85 KB
Patient assessment in palliative care: h
β
Geoffrey P. Dunn
π
Article
π
2001
π
Elsevier Science
π
English
β 101 KB
βIs there a case for using visual analog
β
John Brazier; Christopher McCabe
π
Article
π
2007
π
John Wiley and Sons
π
English
β 75 KB
The paper by Parkin and Devlin (P&D) makes an important contribution to the ongoing debate regarding appropriate methods for valuing health states (Parkin and Devlin, 2006). It seems entirely right to question the prevailing view in the health economics literature, that VAS comes a poor third behind
Cognitive and socio-motivational aspects
β
Katharina Scheiter; Peter Gerjets
π
Article
π
2009
π
Springer Netherlands
π
English
β 138 KB
Shock as a Determinant of Poor Patient-C
β
SUSANNE S. PEDERSEN; KRISTA C. VAN DEN BROEK; MARTHA VAN DEN BERG; DOMINIC A. M.
π
Article
π
2010
π
John Wiley and Sons
π
English
β 100 KB