ArticlePharmacoEconomics2007
The increasingly complex fourth hurdle for pharmaceuticals.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of budget impact estimations and impact on patient access: a hepatitis C case study.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Article
- Critical Appraisal of Reimbursement List in Bosnia and Herzegovina.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Article
- Orphan drugs expenditure in the Netherlands in the period 2006-2012.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2014Article
- Unravelling drug reimbursement outcomes: a comparative study of the role of pharmacoeconomic evidence in Dutch and Swedish reimbursement decision making.PharmacoEconomics · 2013Article
- Relationship between financial impact and coverage of drugs in Australia.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2013Article
- Comparing pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement policies in Croatia to the European Union Member States.Croatian medical journal · 2011Review
- How to assess the value of medicines?Frontiers in pharmacology · 2010Article
- Should financial incentives be used to differentially reward 'me-too' and innovative drugs?PharmacoEconomics · 2010Review
- Healthcare rationing by proxy: cost-effectiveness analysis and the misuse of the $50,000 threshold in the US.PharmacoEconomics · 2010Article
- Health economic assessment: a methodological primer.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2009Review
- Recent national and regional drug reforms in Sweden: implications for pharmaceutical companies in Europe.PharmacoEconomics · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are three known criteria that underlie drug reimbursement decisions: therapeutic value, cost effectiveness and burden of disease. However, evidence from recent reimbursement decisions in several jurisdictions points to residual unexplained variables, one of which may be budget impact. An economic rationale for carrying out budget impact analyses is opportunity cost, measured by the economic benefits foregone by using resources in one way rather than another. Under certain assumptions, cost-effectiveness analysis accounts for opportunity cost while conveying to the decision maker the price of maximising health gains, subject to a budget constraint. However, the underlying assumptions are implausible, particularly in the context of pharmaceutical care. Although drugs that are cost effective may lead to unambiguous health gains among patient groups for whom the drugs are indicated, the opportunity costs could conceivably lead to a reduction in aggregate health gains, or failure to meet different kinds of equity considerations. The pertinent policy question is where to find the resources to fund new innovations, such as cost-effective pharmaceuticals, or drugs targeting severe diseases. It may be a matter of redeployment of resources across healthcare sectors, cancelling the funding of (older) pharmaceuticals that are less cost effective, or delisting drugs that are cost effective but target less burdensome conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17803332What 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.