Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12959624›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics2003

Practical aspects of designing and conducting pharmacoeconomic studies in Japan.

Jim Doherty, Keiko Sato

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jim DohertyOutcomes Research, Pharmacia Japan, Tokyo, Japan. jim.doherty@pharmacia.com
Keiko Sato

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of simultaneous global clinical trials and drug registration strategies has increased the demand for global pharmacoeconomic strategies. Outcomes researchers in pharmaceutical companies are faced with the challenge of assessing at a strategic level what pharmacoeconomic data are most useful in Japan and when, and then deciding at a tactical level what type of study designs are feasible. This paper is written mainly for the benefit of researchers working outside of Japan in the pharmaceutical/medical device industry or academia who are interested in conducting research in Japan. We reviewed the existing pharmacoeconomic literature in Japan, and found that the number of studies per year has been steadily increasing. The majority of studies have been cost-effectiveness and cost-consequence analyses. Typical data sources available in Japan are somewhat limited compared with other Western countries. However, charge data can be easily accessed through the national uniform reimbursement fee system and these data are particularly relevant for pharmaceutical pricing negotiations with the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW). The present use of pharmacoeconomic data by pharmaceutical companies is mainly for pricing negotiations but recent reforms make certain types of data useful for marketing strategies too. The demand for pharmacoeconomic data may increase because of upcoming MHLW pharmaceutical pricing and/or recent health insurance system reforms. Economic evaluation of medical technologies in Japan, though lagging behind North America, Australia and Europe, has the potential to rapidly gather momentum as increasing cost-escalation worries contribute to a growing interest in pharmacoeconomic data.

Indexed as

Economics, PharmaceuticalHumansJapanResearch Design

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.