English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Resource limitations require choosing which candidates to progress at any stage of development to pursue, delay, or terminate. The choices must balance many dimensions such as efficacy, safety, pharmacology, market urgency, etc. The challenge is to integrate the knowledge and experience of the product development team with the findings from completed experiments and trials to inform clear, objective, and consistent development decisions. We describe, and illustrate with application to an actual development project, an approach for quantitatively assessing alternative candidates at any stage of development. The method is based on mathematical combination of sets of pairwise comparisons, which are much simpler to carry out than multi-item ranking or weighting. The dimensions of the decisions, the rankings of the possible outcomes for each dimension, and the rules for combining the components to inform a decision are determined by the project team with management concurrence before obtaining the determinative data. All of the stakeholders participate in the decision process, to assure optimum relevance to clinically oriented project teams and science-oriented management committees. Laying out the rules before a candidate reaches the point of a decision at a key point of the development process maximizes the opportunity for making the actual decision objective and transparent, and facilitates exploration of the sensitivity of the recommended decision to various assumptions. The process can be applied at any stage of clinical development. Its statistical properties can be evaluated using standard statistical decision analysis methods. IJAHP Article: Mu, Saaty/A Style Guide for Paper Proposals To Be Submitted to the International Symposium of the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2014, Washington D.C., U.S.A. International Symposium of the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2 Washington, D. C. June 29 – July 2, 2014

Incorporating Preclinical and Clinical Knowledge and Experience to Evaluate Drug Development Projects Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process