SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Wysowski DK, Swartz L. Adverse drug event surveillance and drug withdrawals in the United States, 1969–2002: the importance of reporting suspected reactions. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:13639.
  • 2
    Hirst C, Cook S, Dai W, et al. A call for international harmonization in therapeutic risk management. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2006;15:83949.
  • 3
    Institute of Medicine. The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine (U.S.), 2007.
  • 4
    Wolfe SG, Chey WY, Washington MK, et al. Tolerability and safety of alosetron during long-term administration in female and male irritable bowel syndrome patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:80311.
    Direct Link:
  • 5
    Lynd LD, Najafzadeh M, Colley L, et al. Using the incremental net benefit framework for quantitative benefit–risk analysis in regulatory decision-making—a case study of alosetron in irritable bowel syndrome. Value Health 10 September 2009 [Epub ahead of print.
  • 6
    Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Manjunath R, et al. Factors that affect adherence to bipolar disorder treatments—a stated-preference approach. Med Care 2007;45:54552.
  • 7
    Ryan M, Netten A, Skatun D, Smith P. Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome—an application to social care for older people. J Health Econ 2006;25:92744.
  • 8
    Ashcroft DM, Seston E, Griffiths CEM. Trade-offs between the benefits and risks of drug treatment for psoriasis: a discrete choice experiment with UK dermatologists. Br J Dermatol 2006;155:123641.
  • 9
    Johnson FR, Özdemir S, Mansfield C, et al. Crohn's disease patients' risk-benefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. Gastroenterology 2009;133:76979.
  • 10
    Johnson FR, Ozdemir S, Hauber B, Kauf TL. Women's willingness to accept perceived risks for vasomotor symptom relief. J Womens Health 2007;16:102840.
  • 11
    Kuhfeld WF, Garratt M, Tobias RD. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. J Mark Res 1994;31:54557.
  • 12
    Dey A. Orthogonal Fractional Factorial Designs. New York: Halstead Press, 1985.
  • 13
    Huber J, Zwerina KB. The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs. J Mark Res 1996;33:30717.
  • 14
    Kanninen B. Optimal design for multinomial choice experiments. Journal of Marketing Research 2002;39:21427.
  • 15
    Zwerina K, Huber J, Kuhfeld WF. A general method for constructing efficient choice designs. SAS Working Paper, 2006.
  • 16
    Ipsos Observer. Data Collection. Available from: http://www.ipsos-na.com/observer/[Accessed June 2008.
  • 17
    Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
  • 18
    Gauss 7.0 [Computer Program]. Black Diamond, WA: Aptech Systems, Inc., 2005.
  • 19
    Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
  • 20
    Camilleri M, Chey WY, Mayer EA, et al. A randomized controlled clinical trial of the serotonin type 3 receptor antagonist alosetron in women with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:173340.
  • 21
    Camilleri M, Northcutt AR, Kong S, et al. Efficacy and safety of alosetron in women with irritable bowel syndrome: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2000;355:103540.
  • 22
    Mangel AW, Northcutt AR. Review article: the safety and efficacy of alosetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, in female irritable bowel syndrome patients. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1999;13(Suppl. 2):7782.