ArticlePharmacoEconomics2010
Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Ireland: a review of the process.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2010. 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.
- Cost-effectiveness evidence on approved cancer drugs in Ireland: the limits of data availability and implications for public accountability.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Article
- Health Technology Assessment of Drugs in Ireland: An Analysis of Timelines.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2020Article
- The Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation Process in Ireland.PharmacoEconomics · 2016Article
- The Irish Cost-Effectiveness Threshold: Does it Support Rational Rationing or Might it Lead to Unintended Harm to Ireland's Health System?PharmacoEconomics · 2016Article
- Decision-makers' preferences for approving new medicines in Wales: a discrete-choice experiment with assessment of external validity.PharmacoEconomics · 2013Article
- A review of the differences and similarities between generic drugs and their originator counterparts, including economic benefits associated with usage of generic medicines, using Ireland as a case study.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2013Review
- Reimbursement decisions of the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group: influence of policy and clinical and economic factors.PharmacoEconomics · 2012Article
- Health technology funding decision-making processes around the world: the same, yet different.PharmacoEconomics · 2011Review
- Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To describe the pharmacoeconomic assessment process in Ireland and to provide examples of recent appraisals and the subsequent impact on pricing and reimbursement decisions. The pharmacoeconomic appraisals conducted by the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) between September 2006 and February 2009 were reviewed. The NCPE recommendations and subsequent reimbursement decisions by the Health Service Executive (HSE) were recorded. Recommendations made by the NCPE were compared with those of UK agencies. The duration of the NCPE pharmacoeconomic process and the time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was estimated. The budget impact assessments from the pharmaceutical companies were reviewed and compared for consistency. The NCPE conducted 12 single technology appraisals during the study period. Eight of the medicines assessed were either recommended as a cost-effective use of resources or recommended with certain restrictions, and were funded by the HSE. Of the four medicines that were not considered cost effective, two were reimbursed after a price reduction was negotiated and the remaining two were not. The NCPE recommendations concurred with those of the UK agencies for the majority of appraisals, with the exception of sunitinib and lapatinib. The average duration of the NCPE process was 2.7 months. The average time from marketing authorization to reimbursement was 7 months. The review of budget impact assessments highlighted a high degree of variability between submissions. The findings of this review highlight the efficiency of the pharmacoeconomic process and the acceptance of the NCPE recommendations by the HSE for pricing and reimbursement decisions. NCPE recommendations broadly concurred with those of UK agencies for the majority of appraisals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20222754What 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.