Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29624799›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2018

A checklist for managed access programmes for reimbursement co-designed by Canadian patients and caregivers.

Andrea Young, Devidas Menon, Jackie Street, Walla Al-Hertani, Tania Stafinski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. A checklist for managed access programmes for reimbursement co-designed by Canadian patients and caregivers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrea YoungHealth Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0784-9360
Devidas MenonHealth Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Jackie StreetSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Walla Al-HertaniCumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Tania StafinskiHealth Technology & Policy Unit, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
University of Alberta · CAThe University of Adelaide · AUUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

CIHR TR3 119194
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionReimbursement decisions on orphan drugs carry significant uncertainty, and as the amount increases, so does the risk of making a wrong decision, where harms outweigh benefits. Consequently, patients often face limited access to orphan drugs. Managed access programmes (MAPs) are a mechanism for managing risk while enabling access to potentially beneficial drugs. Patients and their caregivers have expressed support for these programmes and see patient input as critical to successful implementation. However, they have yet to be systematically involved in their design.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to co-design with patients and caregivers a tool for the development of managed access programmes.

methodsBuilding upon established relationships with the Canadian Organization for Rare Disorders, the project team collaborated with patients and caregivers using the principles of participatory action research. Data were collected at two workshops and analysed using a thematic network approach.

resultsPatients and caregivers co-designed a checklist comprised of six aspects of an ideal MAP relating to accountability (programme goals); governance (MAP-specific committee oversight, patient input, international collaboration); and evidence collection (outcome measures and continuation criteria, on-going monitoring and registries). They recognized that health-care resources are finite and considered disease or drug eligibility criteria for deciding when to use a MAP (eg drugs treating diseases for which there are no other legitimate alternatives).

conclusionsA patient and caregiver-designed checklist was created, which emphasized patient involvement and transparency. Further research is needed to examine the feasibility of this checklist and roles for other stakeholders.

Indexed as

CaregiversChecklistCooperative BehaviorOrphan Drug ProductionCanadaCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision MakingHumansPatient ParticipationRisk Managementmanaged access programmesorphan drugspatient inputpatient involvementrare diseases

Identifiers

PMID29624799
PMCPMC6250858
OpenAlexW2796430719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.