ReviewPharmacoEconomics2016
The Value of Medicines: A Crucial but Vague Concept.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The VBHC big picture: an umbrella review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Pooled it
- Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements for Pharmaceutical Products in the United States: A Systematic Review.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2017Pooled it
- Defining and Measuring the Affordability of New Medicines: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Pooled it
- A Framework for Considering the Role of the Public Sector in R&D of Health Technology.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Review
- Understanding medicine access strategies for innovator medicines registered in South Africa.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- New Anticancer Drugs: Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Value in Myeloma Care: Myth or Reality.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2022Review
- Stakeholder opinions on value in healthcare.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2019Article
- Economic evaluation of personalized medicine: a call for real-world data.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2017Article
- Defining Value: The Need for a Longer, Broader View.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Value or cost: looking for the wider perspective.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2017Article
- Review
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
Health Technology Assessment is increasingly used to evaluate the value of healthcare products and to prioritize resources; however, defining exactly what value is and how it should be measured remains a challenge. In this article, we report the results of a literature review, focusing on nine European countries, with the aim of investigating how value is defined from the perspective of different stakeholders, how definitions of value are used, and how value is incorporated into decision making. Only three articles were identified that presented definitions of value, and there was no single shared definition of value in healthcare, which appears to be a highly subjective concept. The majority of the countries investigated combine clinical assessment with economic evaluation to make reimbursement recommendations; the quality-adjusted life-year is the most commonly used measure of value but does not capture broader aspects of value that may be important to patients and healthcare systems. We describe the use of value-based pricing and multi-criteria decision analysis, two approaches to the incorporation of broader aspects of value into decision making. Overall, we have identified considerable variation in how a product's value is defined by different stakeholders. Although a universal understanding of value in healthcare is important, it is clear that current definitions are insufficient, potentially leading to inconsistent reimbursement decisions. Ultimately, the establishment of clearer policies for defining and measuring value in healthcare is needed, and is likely to lead to improvements in the consistency of decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27444306What 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.