ReviewPharmacoEconomics2017
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements: An Updated International Review.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mapping the landscape of managed entry agreements: a systematic review of global frameworks, system-level components, and implementation challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements for devices and diagnostics in the United States: a systematic review.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2022Pooled it
- Application of Managed Entry Agreements for Innovative Therapies in Different Settings and Combinations: A Feasibility Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- The Use of Risk-Sharing Contracts in Healthcare: Theoretical and Empirical Assessments.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Prediction Error in Quality-Adjusted Life Years in Economic Evaluations of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Comparison Based on Projected and Observed Updated Survival.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to the 3 Sides of Extended Reality-Rehabilitation Adoption: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Risk-sharing agreements for medical devices: a stakeholder-based qualitative study in Czechia.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Modeling First-Line Daratumumab Use for Newly Diagnosed, Transplant-Ineligible, Multiple Myeloma: A Cost-Effectiveness and Risk Analysis for Healthcare Payers.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2024Article
- The Value of Flexible Vaccine Manufacturing Capacity: Value Drivers, Estimation Methods, and Approaches to Value Recognition in Health Technology Assessment.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Review
- Stakeholder Insights into Czech Performance-Based Managed Entry Agreements: Potential for Transformative Change in Pharmaceutical Access?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Towards implementing new payment models for the reimbursement of high-cost, curative therapies in Europe: insights from semi-structured interviews.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- The Innovative Medicines Fund: a universal model for faster and fairer access to new promising medicines or a Trojan horse for low-value creep?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2023Article
- The long-term impact and value of curative therapy for HIV: a modelling analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Article
- Opportunities and Threats of the Legally Facilitated Performance-Based Managed Entry Agreements in Slovakia: The Early-Adoption Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Anticancer Drug Appraisals Including Managed Entry Agreements in South Korea and England.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Article
- Healthcare Systems across Europe and the US: The Managed Entry Agreements Experience.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Introduction of managed entry agreements in Korea: Problem, policy, and politics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- CMS Coverage With Evidence Development-Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Resilient managed competition during pandemics: lessons from the Italian experience during COVID-19.Health economics, policy, and law · 2022Article
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
Enthusiasm for performance-based risk-sharing arrangements (PBRSAs) continues but at variable pace across countries. Our objective was to identify and characterize publicly available cases and related trends for these arrangements. We performed a review of PBRSAs from 1993 to 2016 using the University of Washington PBRSA Database. Arrangements were categorized according to a previously published taxonomy. Macro-level trends were identified related to the timing of adoption, countries involved, types of arrangements, and disease areas. Our search yielded 437 arrangements. Among these, 183 (41.9%) were categorized as currently active, while 58.1% have expired. Five main types of arrangements have been identified, namely coverage with evidence development (149 cases, 34.1%), performance-linked reimbursement (104 cases, 23.8%), conditional treatment continuation (78 cases, 17.8%), financial or utilization (71 cases, 16.2%), and hybrid schemes with multiple components (35 cases, 8.0%). The pace of adoption varies across countries but has renewed an upward trend after a lull in 2012/2013. Conditions in the USA may be changing toward a more favorable environment of PBRSAs. Interest in PBRSAs remains high, suggesting they are a viable coverage and reimbursement mechanism for a wide range of medical products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28695544What 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.