Access Statistics for Rosalie Viney

Author contact details at EconPapers.

Working Paper File Downloads Abstract Views
Last month 3 months 12 months Total Last month 3 months 12 months Total
A model for best practice HTA 0 0 0 158 1 1 9 727
An economic evaluation of the prison methadone program in New South Wales, CHERE Project Report No 22 0 0 0 111 2 2 6 889
Catastrophic insurance: Impact of the Australian Medicare Safety Net on fees, service use and out-of-pocket costs, CHERE Working Paper 2006/9 0 0 0 74 1 1 6 342
Complexity and doctor choices when discussing contraceptives 0 0 0 23 2 5 10 88
Consultancy to progress hospital in the home care provision: Final report, CHERE Project Report No 13 0 0 2 35 2 4 14 231
Decisions about Pap tests: What influences women and providers? 0 0 0 30 2 3 9 130
Delivery of less urgent ambulatory care in a hospital setting - Report the NSW Department of Health, CHERE Project Report No 2 0 0 0 9 3 8 20 111
Deriving utility weights for the EQ-5D-5L using a discrete choice experiment. CHERE Working Paper 2012/01 0 0 2 107 2 5 24 382
Does the reason for buying health insurance influence behaviour? CHERE Working Paper 2006/1 0 0 0 124 1 3 11 583
Evaluating changes in women's attitudes towards cervical screening following a screening promotion campaign and a free vaccination program. CHERE Working Paper 2009/3 0 0 0 49 4 4 13 282
Evaluation of participants' experiences with a non-restrictive minimally-structured lifestyle intervention. CHERE Working Paper 2010/11 0 0 0 12 0 1 6 105
General Practitioners knowledge, views and practices regarding cervical cancer screening in Australia. CHERE Working Paper 2010/6 0 0 0 26 0 0 2 153
Health care policy evaluation: empirical analysis of the restrictions implied by Quality Adjusted Life Years, CHERE Working Paper 2006/10 0 0 0 73 0 0 13 379
Hospital in the Home in NSW, CHERE Project Report No 16 0 0 0 37 3 3 10 201
Incorporating economic evidence into cancer care: searching for the missing link 0 0 0 23 0 2 6 148
Linking health outcomes to priority setting, planning and resource allocation - Report to the NSW Department of Health, CHERE Project Report No 1 0 0 1 14 3 4 6 100
Men?s preferences for treatment of early stage prostate cancer: Results from a discrete choice experiment, CHERE Working Paper 2006/14 0 0 1 44 6 6 17 268
NSW breast and cervical screening program review, CHERE Project Report No 14 0 0 0 6 3 4 9 91
Patients? perceptions of the value of PET in diagnosis and management of non-small call lung cancer, CHERE Working Paper 2007/5 0 0 0 7 0 0 5 113
Reducing the use of ineffective health care interventions. CHERE Working Paper 2010/5 0 0 0 136 2 2 8 590
Review of Positron Emission Tomography at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, CHERE Project Report No 18 0 0 0 48 4 4 8 383
Service impact analysis of telehealth in NSW, CHERE Project Report No 12 0 0 0 28 5 5 8 155
The effect of discounting on quality of life valuation using the Time Trade-Off, CHERE Working Paper 2008/3 0 0 0 25 0 1 6 84
Using qualitative methods to validate a stated preference survey for evaluating health services, CHERE Discussion Paper No 47 0 0 0 150 1 5 9 1,227
Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-LC13 in Australians with early stage non-small cell lung cancer, CHERE Working Paper 2007/13 0 1 2 220 2 7 25 1,531
Valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis, CHERE Working Paper 2007/9 0 0 0 41 1 1 10 232
Who?s getting caught? An analysis of the Australian Medicare Safety Net, CHERE Working Paper 2006/8 0 0 1 43 0 1 11 189
Why worry about awareness in choice problems? Econometric analysis of screening for cervical cancer 0 0 0 106 0 0 4 502
Total Working Papers 0 1 9 1,759 50 82 285 10,216

Journal Article File Downloads Abstract Views
Last month 3 months 12 months Total Last month 3 months 12 months Total
A Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies of Multi-Attribute Utility-Based Instruments (CREATE) 0 0 0 2 0 1 7 18
A Pilot Discrete Choice Experiment to Explore Preferences for EQ-5D-5L Health States 0 0 0 35 2 3 10 120
A systematic review of scabies transmission models and data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of scabies interventions 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 9
AN AUSTRALIAN DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT TO VALUE EQ‐5D HEALTH STATES 0 0 1 8 3 5 13 43
Are the True Impacts of Adverse Events Considered in Economic Models of Antineoplastic Drugs? A Systematic Review 0 0 0 9 2 3 6 52
Australian Utility Weights for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument Derived from the Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30 0 0 0 2 2 5 10 34
Birth models of care and intervention rates: The impact of birth centres 0 0 1 3 3 4 11 20
Carrots and sticks—the fall and fall of private health insurance in Australia 0 0 0 4 4 5 7 198
Consideration Sets and Their Role in Modelling Doctor Recommendations About Contraceptives 0 0 0 7 4 5 16 35
Costing Alternative Birth Settings for Women at Low Risk of Complications: A Systematic Review 0 0 0 0 6 6 9 14
Decisions about Pap tests: What influences women and providers? 0 0 0 10 1 4 7 83
Disinvestment and Value-Based Purchasing Strategies for Pharmaceuticals: An International Review 0 0 0 2 0 0 8 70
EFFICIENCY AND EQUITY: A STATED PREFERENCE APPROACH 0 0 2 7 5 7 17 60
ESTIMATING HEALTH STATE UTILITY VALUES FROM DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS—A QALY SPACE MODEL APPROACH 0 0 0 5 0 3 11 42
Economic Evidence at the Local Level 0 0 0 11 3 4 8 105
Economic evaluations of trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and critique 0 0 0 9 2 3 4 50
Empirical investigation of experimental design properties of discrete choice experiments in health care 0 0 1 74 3 5 10 323
Employer survey to estimate the productivity friction period 0 0 0 5 3 6 9 64
Estimation of an EORTC QLU-C10 Value Set for Spain Using a Discrete Choice Experiment 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 9
Exploring the Trade-Off Between Economic and Health Outcomes During a Pandemic: A Discrete Choice Experiment of Lockdown Policies in Australia 0 0 0 3 4 4 9 20
French Value-Set of the QLU-C10D, a Cancer-Specific Utility Measure Derived from the QLQ-C30 0 1 1 2 1 3 5 30
How Should Discrete Choice Experiments with Duration Choice Sets Be Presented for the Valuation of Health States? 0 0 0 0 3 6 12 17
How are Child-Specific Utility Instruments Used in Decision Making in Australia? A Review of Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee Public Summary Documents 0 0 0 1 0 5 6 9
Investigating the Association Between Self-Reported Comorbid Anxiety and Depression and Health Service Use in Cancer Survivors 0 0 1 3 2 2 5 21
Investigating the relative value of health and social care related quality of life using a discrete choice experiment 0 0 0 2 1 2 8 17
Is Dimension Order Important when Valuing Health States Using Discrete Choice Experiments Including Duration? 0 0 0 0 2 3 8 18
Linking measures of health gain to explicit priority setting by an Area Health Service in Australia 0 0 0 4 0 1 2 22
One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation 0 0 0 9 1 3 12 44
Preferences for new and existing contraceptive products 0 0 0 3 1 1 8 82
Real-World Evidence: A Comparison of the Australian Herceptin Program and Clinical Trials of Trastuzumab for HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer 0 0 0 1 5 7 12 33
Response Patterns in Health State Valuation Using Endogenous Attribute Attendance and Latent Class Analysis 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 25
Sex Discrimination and Non-random Sampling in the Australian Labour Market 0 0 0 1 5 5 11 367
The Impact of Different DCE-Based Approaches When Anchoring Utility Scores 0 0 0 6 3 5 10 41
The SF-6Dv2: How Does the New Classification System Impact the Distribution of Responses Compared with the Original SF-6D? 0 0 0 8 0 2 7 48
The effect of adverse information and positive promotion on women's preferences for prescribed contraceptive products 0 0 0 8 1 3 10 83
U.K. utility weights for the EORTC QLU‐C10D 0 0 0 2 0 0 6 80
United States Utility Algorithm for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a Multiattribute Utility Instrument Based on a Cancer-Specific Quality-of-Life Instrument 0 0 0 0 2 2 9 20
Using Discrete-Choice Experiment Methods to Estimate the Value of Informal Care: The Case of Children with Intellectual Disability 0 0 0 0 1 1 8 18
Using programme budgeting and marginal analysis to assist population based strategic planning for coronary heart disease 0 0 0 18 0 0 3 102
Using repeated choice experiments to evaluate the impact of policy changes on cervical screening 0 0 0 23 5 7 15 124
Using stated preference discrete choice modeling to evaluate health care programs 0 0 3 151 2 2 14 372
Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination 0 0 1 80 2 2 6 373
Valuing Meta-Health Effects for Use in Economic Evaluations to Inform Reimbursement Decisions: A Review of the Evidence 0 0 0 5 3 4 9 30
Valuing SF-6D Health States Using a Discrete Choice Experiment 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 12
What’s Good and Bad About Contraceptive Products? 0 0 0 0 2 2 9 14
What’s Good and Bad About Contraceptive Products? 0 0 0 8 1 1 19 93
Who's Getting Caught? An Analysis of the Australian Medicare Safety Net 0 0 1 17 4 5 11 87
Why worry about awareness in choice problems? Econometric analysis of screening for cervical cancer 0 0 0 50 0 1 9 211
Total Journal Articles 0 1 12 603 98 153 429 3,762

Chapter File Downloads Abstract Views
Last month 3 months 12 months Total Last month 3 months 12 months Total
Design of Choice Experiments in Health Economics 0 0 1 13 4 12 25 72
Design of Choice Experiments in Health Economics 0 0 0 10 1 2 14 45
Total Chapters 0 0 1 23 5 14 39 117

logo

LogEc Home

Top Working Papers
Top Journal Articles
Top Books
Top Chapters
Top Software Items

Top Authors

Top Working Paper series and Journals

About LogEc

Authors with papers registered in the RePEc Author Service.

Register yourself as an author or register more papers in the RePEc Author Service.

Authors with no registered papers

RePEc
LogEc provides access and usage statistics for services based on the RePEc data set.

Örebro UniversityLogEc is hosted by the Örebro University School of Business.

Questions or comments? Please see our explanation of how the statistics are collected or e-mail

Since October 2025, abstract view statistics are potentially heavily influenced by traffic from AI bots and tools that we could not eliminate despite our best efforts.

Statistics updated 2026-05-06