Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16777256›Full record

ArticleHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2007

Reference drug programs: effectiveness and policy implications.

Sebastian Schneeweiss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Competition in pharmaceuticals: more product- than price-oriented?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Addressing cost-related barriers to prescription drug use in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2014
    Article
  6. Effectiveness, safety and cost of drug substitution in hypertension.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2010
    Article
  7. Comparison of tiered formularies and reference pricing policies: a systematic review.Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal · 2009
    Article
  8. Does knowledge of medication prices predict physicians' support for cost effective prescribing policies.The Canadian journal of clinical pharmacology = Journal canadien de pharmacologie clinique · 2008
    Article
  9. Developments in post-marketing comparative effectiveness research.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2007
    Review
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

1 author.

Sebastian SchneeweissHarvard Medical School, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 1620 Tremont Street, Suite 3030, Boston, MA 02120, USA. schnee@post.harvard.edu

Funding

Effects of income-based drug charges on older PatientsR01AG021950 · NIA · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SCHNEEWEISS, SEBASTIAN G. · 2003 to 2006
$1.3M
CONSEQUENCES OF DRUG COST SHARING IN THE ELDERLYR01HS010881 · AHRQ · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SCHNEEWEISS, SEBASTIAN G. · 2000 to 2006
$263k
AHRQ HHS 2-R01-HS10881AHRQ HHS R01 HS010881NIA NIH HHS 1-R01-AG021950NIA NIH HHS R01 AG021950
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the current economic environment, health care systems are constantly struggling to contain rapidly rising costs. Drug costs are targeted by a wide variety of measures. Many jurisdictions have implemented reference drug programs (RDPs) or similar therapeutic substitution programs. This paper summarizes the mechanism and rationale of RDPs and presents evidence of their economic effectiveness and clinical safety. RDPs for pharmaceutical reimbursement are based on the assumption that drugs within specified medication groups are therapeutically equivalent and clinically interchangeable and that a common reimbursement level can thus be established. If the evidence documents that a higher price for a given drug does not buy greater effectiveness or reduced toxicity, then under RDP such extra costs are not covered. RDPs or therapeutic substitutions based on therapeutic equivalence are seen as logical extensions of generic substitution that is based on bioequivalence of drugs. If the goal is to achieve full drug coverage for as many patients as possible in the most efficient manner, then RDPs in combination with prior authorization programs are safer and more effective than simplistic fiscal drug policies, including fixed co-payments, co-insurances, or deductibles. RDPs will reduce spending in the less innovative but largest market, while fully covering all patients. Prior authorization will ensure that patients with a specified indication will benefit from the most innovative therapies with full coverage. In practice, however, not all patients and drugs will fit exactly into one of the two categories. Therefore, a process of medically indicated exemptions that will consider full coverage should accompany an RDP. In the current economic environment, health care systems are constantly struggling to contain rapidly rising costs. Drug costs are targeted by a wide variety of measures. Many jurisdictions have implemented reference drug programs, and others are considering them. This paper summarizes the mechanism and rationale of RDPs, presents evidence of their economic effectiveness and clinical safety, and concludes with some practical implications of implementing RDP policies.

Indexed as

Economics, PharmaceuticalHealth PolicyProgram EvaluationCost ControlDrug CostsHumansPharmaceutical PreparationsTherapeutic EquivalencyUnited StatesPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID16777256
PMCPMC2884180

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.