Share - Bookmark
-
- Download from
-
-
-
-
- Funded by
-
1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Familial breast cancer: the classification and care of women at risk of familial breast cancer in primary, secondary and tertiary care 2006. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164.
2. Mardis ER. The impact of next-generation sequencing technology on genetics. Trends Genet. 2008;24(3):133-41. doi:10.1016/ j.tig.2007.12.007.
3. Ioannidis JPA, Khoury MJ. Are randomized trials obsolete or more important than ever in the genomic era? Genome Medicine. 2013;5(4):32. doi:10.1186/Gm436.
4. Buchanan J, Wordsworth S, Schuh A. Issues surrounding the health economic evaluation of genomic technologies. Pharmacogenomics. 2013;14(15):1833-47. doi:10.2217/pgs.13.183.
5. Foster MW, Mulvihill JJ, Sharp RR. Evaluating the utility of personal genomic information. Genet Med. 2009;11(8):570-4. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181a2743e.
6. Veenstra DL, Piper M, Haddow JE, Pauker SG, Klein R, Richards CS, et al. Improving the efficiency and relevance of evidencebased recommendations in the era of whole-genome sequencing: an EGAPP methods update. Genet Med. 2013;15(1):14-24. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.106.
7. Giacomini M, Miller F, O'Brien BJ. Economic considerations for health insurance coverage of emerging genetic tests. Community Genet. 2003;6(2):61-73.
8. Grosse SD, Wordsworth S, Payne K. Economic methods for valuing the outcomes of genetic testing: beyond cost-effectiveness analysis. Genet Med. 2008;10(9):648-54. doi:10.1097/GIM. 0b013e3181837217.
9. Mushlin AI, Mooney C, Holloway RG, Detsky AS, Mattson DH, Phelps CE. The cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging for patients with equivocal neurological symptoms. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;13(01):21-34. doi:10.1017/ S0266462300010205.
10. de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 2012;21(2):145-72. doi:10.1002/hec.1697.