ArticlePharmacoEconomics2013
Korean guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluation (second and updated version) : consensus and compromise.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative evaluation of the health utilities index mark 3 and the short form 6D: evidence from an individual participant data meta-analysis of very preterm and very low birthweight adults.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Onwards and Upwards: A Systematic Survey of Economic Evaluation Methods in Oncology.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2021Pooled it
- Modeling Healthcare Costs Attributable to Secondhand Smoke Exposure at Home among South Korean Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- A Review of Current Approaches to Evaluating and Reimbursing New Medicines in a Subset of OECD Countries.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Review
- Incorporating productivity loss in health economic evaluations: a review of guidelines and practices worldwide for research agenda in China.BMJ global health · 2022Review
- Projecting Lifetime Health Outcomes and Costs Associated with the Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Exposure among Adult Women in Korea.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How Sensitive is Sensitivity Analysis?: Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomic Submissions in Korea.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- A Review of Utility Measurement Methods Used in Pharmacoeconomic Submissions to HIRA in South Korea: Methodological Consistency and Areas for Improvement.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Review
- Which Criteria are Considered and How are They Evaluated in Health Technology Assessments? A Review of Methodological Guidelines Used in Western and Asian Countries.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Review
- Value Frameworks: Adaptation of Korean Versions of Value Frameworks for Oncology.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Regenerative Medicine in South Korea: Bridging the Gap Between Authorization and Reimbursement.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- A Meta-Regression Analysis of Utility Weights for Breast Cancer: The Power of Patients' Experience.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2020Review
- Government pharmaceutical pricing strategies in the Asia-Pacific region: an overview.Journal of market access & health policy · 2019Review
- Understanding the adoption of new drugs decided by several stakeholders in the South Korean market: a nonparametric event history analysis.Health economics review · 2018Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccines Compared with Trivalent Influenza Vaccines in Young Children and Older Adults in Korea.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Article
- Relative importance of the EQ-5D five dimensions among patients with chronic diseases in South Korea - a comparison with the general population preference weights.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2018Article
- The Utility of 5 Hypothetical Health States in Heart Failure Using Time Trade-Off (TTO) and EQ-5D-5L in Korea.Clinical drug investigation · 2018Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of infant pneumococcal vaccination with PHiD-CV in Korea.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Article
- Modeling lifetime costs and health outcomes attributable to secondhand smoke exposure at home among Korean adult women.BMJ open · 2017Article
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
The first version of the Korean guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluation was published by Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) in 2006. Since the introduction of the first version, domestic experience with the application of the recommendations has accumulated, and methodologies in certain areas have progressed considerably. Based on these experiences, HIRA initiated a guidelines revision project to address the need for revisions. The purpose of this study is to share the process used to complete these guideline revisions and to provide the contents of the revised guidelines. In developing the current revision, meetings with the advisory committee and working-level meetings with pharmaceutical companies were held several times to reach as much of a consensus as possible, and the results of a survey of pharmaceutical companies and decision makers regarding the existing guidelines were considered. The second version of the guidelines clarified the level of data requirement ('must', 'recommended', 'preferred') based on the data availability, the information needs of the decision makers and the strength of the evidence. The recommended perspective economic studies should take has been modified and additional guidance has been provided on QALY measurement. Manuals for systematic reviews and indirect comparisons have been published, and a standardized reporting format for expert opinions has been added. Sections on preferred methods for evaluations, sensitivity analysis, modelling and time horizon have been elucidated. The revised guidelines clarify the expression of the recommendations, making them more user-friendly, and provide more specific guidance to improve the quality and comparability across submissions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23322587What 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.