Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20883050›Full record

ArticleDrugs2010

Use of economic evaluation in decision making: evidence and recommendations for improvement.

Steven Simoens

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drugs, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
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.

Steven SimoensResearch Centre for Pharmaceutical Care and Pharmaco-economics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. steven.simoens@pharm.kuleuven.be

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Information about the value for money of a medicine as derived from an economic evaluation can be used for decision-making purposes by policy makers, healthcare payers, healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies. This article illustrates the use of economic evaluation by decision makers and formulates a number of recommendations to enhance the use of such evaluations for decision-making purposes. Over the last decades, there has been a substantial increase in the number of economic evaluations assessing the value for money of medicines. Economic evaluation is used by policy makers and healthcare payers to inform medicine pricing/reimbursement decisions in more and more countries. It is a suitable tool to evaluate medicines and to present information about their value for money to decision makers in a familiar format. In order to fully exploit the use of economic evaluation for decision-making purposes, researchers need to take care to conduct such economic evaluations according to methodologically sound principles. Additionally, researchers need to take into account the decision-making context. They need to identify the various objectives that decision makers pursue and discuss how decision makers can use study findings to attain these objectives. These issues require further attention from researchers, policy makers, healthcare payers, healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies with a view to optimizing the use of economic evaluation in decision making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingEvaluation Studies as TopicHealth PolicyPharmaceutical PreparationsPharmaceutical Preparations

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.