ArticleCNS drugs2004
Neuropsychotherapeutics in the UK: what has been the impact of NICE on prescribing?
Article in CNS drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk-Sharing Agreements in the EU: A Systematic Review of Major Trends.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2018Review
- Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: An update for 2013 Clinical Features, Pathophysiology, Management and Therapeutic Trials.Aging and disease · 2013Review
- Cost-effectiveness of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies: a systematic review of the literature.Autoimmune diseases · 2012Article
- Potential to enhance the prescribing of generic drugs in patients with mental health problems in austria; implications for the future.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2012Article
- Review
- Drugs, money and society (Part II).British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010Article
- Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers.BMC health services research · 2010Review
- NICE: managing conflict.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2008Article
- Use of medicines that influence falls or fractures in a residential home setting.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The UK National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) was set up in 1999 to advise the National Health Service (NHS) on the use of new technologies largely, but not exclusively, on the basis of their clinical and cost effectiveness. There have been problems with this, as with any developing system, most of which have arisen from issues not directly under the control of NICE. Despite this, NICE has already achieved a pivotal role in determining the uptake of new therapies into the NHS. In the area of neuropsychiatric therapies, NICE has examined a number of topics and has generally facilitated the increased use of the agents examined, approving the use, within limitations, of such drugs as riluzole, atypical antipsychotics and cholinesterase inhibitors. Although the use of some of these therapies had been growing, it had previously been restricted by funding in the NHS. As a result of NICE guidance, these funding restrictions have generally been lifted. NICE has rejected one area of neurological therapy so far--that of interferon-beta products and glatiramer acetate for multiple sclerosis--on the grounds of clinical uncertainty about long-term benefits and poor cost effectiveness. However, the UK Government has created a novel risk-sharing scheme in collaboration with the sponsoring companies to make these drugs available at a level of cost effectiveness acceptable to the NHS. The feasibility of this scheme is as yet unclear. This might be seen as either a triumph for NICE or as an undermining of it for political ends. One interesting aspect that is more prominent in neuropsychiatric disorders than in other areas of NICE activity has been the power of patient advocacy in encouraging acceptance of therapies where the evidence base was weak or the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was unfavourable. The principles behind the activities of NICE attract wide support within the NHS, but the details of its decisions have often not been popular within NHS management who have to deliver them. Some of this relates more to the context and political environment within which NICE operates than to a failing within NICE itself. NICE will continue to become increasingly important in determining the use of new drugs within the UK NHS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
14731055What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.