Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Health Technology Assessment of PET in oncology: re Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:637–641

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Højgaard L. Are Health Technology Assessments a reliable tool in the analysis of the clinical value of PET in oncology? Who audits the auditors? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:637–664.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. http://www.nice.org.uk/catta1.asp?c=153.

  3. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bradbury I, Bonnell E, Boynton J, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in cancer management. Health Technology Assessment Report 2. Glasgow: Health Technology Board for Scotland, 2002. http://www.htbs.co.uk/docs/pdf/ASSESSMENT%20REPORT%202.pdf.

  5. Formidling av internasjonale metodevurderinger 2001–2003. Positronemisjonstomografi (PET)—diagnostisk og klinisk nytteverdi. SMM Report 6/2003. Oslo: Senter for Medisinsk Metodevurdering, 2003. http://www.sintef.no/smm/Publikasjoner/FramesetPublikasjoner.htm.

  6. Positron emission tomography, part 2i. Medical Services Advisory Committee. Canberra: Medical Services Advisory Committee, 2001. http://www.msac.gov.au/pdfs/msacref10i.pdf.

  7. Bradbury I, Facey K, Laking G, Sharp P. Investing in new technology: the PET experience. Br J Cancer 2003; 89:224–227.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Redegørelse vedrørende PET-skanning med FDG—med saerlig henblik på kraeftdiagnostik. Copenhagen: Danish National Board of Health, Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment, 2001. http://www.cemtv.dk/publikationer/docs/PET/Redegoerelse.pdf.

  9. PET (positron emissions tomografi), anbefalinger for udbygning af PET og FDG produktion. Copenhagen: Danish National Board of Health, 2002. http://www.sst.dk/publ/Publ2002/KMO-PETskanningsrapport.pdf.

  10. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwing LM, Lijmer JG, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HCW for the STARD group. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Lancet 2003; 361:1–4 and htpp://www.consort-statement.org.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hailey D. Toward transparency in health technology assessment. A checklist for HTA reports. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003; 19:1–7 and http://www.inahta.org.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment (DACEHTA), National Board of Health, Denmark

    Finn Børlum Kristensen

  2. Veteran Administration’s Technology Assessment Program (VATAP), USA

    Elizabeth Adams

  3. Andalusian Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AETSA), Spain

    Eduardo Briones

  4. Ministry of Health and Ageing, Australia

    Damian Coburn

  5. Health Technology Assessment, NHS Quality Improvement Scotland, UK

    Karen Facey

  6. Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment (DACEHTA), National Board of Health, Denmark

    Niels Würgler Hansen

  7. The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), The Netherlands

    Jetty Hoeksema

  8. The Norwegian Center for Health Technology Assessment (SMM), Norway

    Berit Mørland

Authors
  1. Finn Børlum Kristensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth Adams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eduardo Briones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Damian Coburn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Karen Facey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Niels Würgler Hansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jetty Hoeksema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Berit Mørland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Finn Børlum Kristensen.

Additional information

Finn Børlum Kristensen is also Chairman of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology, Assessment (INAHTA).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kristensen, F.B., Adams, E., Briones, E. et al. Health Technology Assessment of PET in oncology: re Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:637–641. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31, 295–297 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-003-1391-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-003-1391-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation