Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26142357›Full record

SynthesisHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2015

A National Approach to Reimbursement Decision-Making on Drugs for Rare Diseases in Canada? Insights from Across the Ponds.

Hilary Short, Tania Stafinski, Devidas Menon

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

3 authors.

Hilary ShortResearch Assistant, Health Technology and Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Tania StafinskiDirector, Health Technology and Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
Devidas MenonProfessor, Health Technology and Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRegardless of the type of health system or payer, coverage decisions on drugs for rare diseases (DRDs) are challenging. While these drugs typically represent the only active treatment option for a progressive and/or life-threatening condition, evidence of clinical benefit is often limited because of small patient populations and the costs are high. Thus, decisions come with considerable uncertainty and risk. In Canada, interest in developing a pan-Canadian decision-making approach informed by international experiences exists.

objectiveTo develop an inventory of existing policies and processes for making coverage decisions on DRDs around the world.

methodsA systematic review of published and unpublished documents describing current policies and processes in the top 20 gross domestic product countries was conducted. Bibliographic databases, the Internet and government/health technology assessment organization websites in each country were searched. Two researchers independently extracted information and tabulated it to facilitate qualitative comparative analyses. Policy experts from each country were contacted and asked to review the information collected for accuracy and completeness.

resultsAlmost all countries have multiple mechanisms through which coverage for a DRD may be sought. However, they typically begin with a review that follows the same process as drugs for more common conditions (i.e., the centralized review process), although specific submission requirements could differ (e.g., no need to submit a cost-effectiveness analysis). When drugs fail to receive a positive recommendation/decision, they are reconsidered by "safety net"-type programs. Eligibility criteria vary across countries, as do the decision options, which may be applied to individual patients or patient groups.

conclusionsWith few exceptions, countries have not created separate centralized review processes for DRDs. Instead, they have modified components of existing mechanisms and added safety nets.

Indexed as

CanadaDecision MakingEligibility DeterminationHumansPrescription DrugsRare DiseasesReimbursement MechanismsState MedicinePrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID26142357
PMCPMC4748348

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.