ArticleJournal of market access & health policy2019
Health technology assessment (HTA) and economic evaluation: efficiency or fairness first.
Article in Journal of market access & health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Valuation of Treatments for Rare Diseases: A Systematic Literature Review of Societal Preference Studies.Advances in therapy · 2023Pooled it
- How Much Does It Cost to Research and Develop a New Drug? A Systematic Review and Assessment.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Pooled it
- Onwards and Upwards: A Systematic Survey of Economic Evaluation Methods in Oncology.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2021Pooled it
- The economic imperative for an AI Productivity Index in healthcare: Beyond clinical promise to fiscal accountability.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Ethical Considerations in Health Technology Assessment for Precision Medicine: A Delphi Study in a Greek Setting.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Public funding for mitochondrial donation: An Australian public deliberation.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Views and opinions of the general public about the reimbursement of expensive medicines in the Netherlands.PloS one · 2025Article
- Estimating and Rewarding the Value of Healthcare Interventions Beyond the Healthcare Sector: A Conceptual Framework.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Comparing Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality-of-Life Instruments: A Dimensionality Assessment Using Factor Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases-A Machine Learning Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Review
- Regulatory, Legal, and Market Aspects of Smart Wearables for Cardiac Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Health Technology Assessment of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products: Comparison Among 3 European Countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Orphan Medicine Incentives: How to Address the Unmet Needs of Rare Disease Patients by Optimizing the European Orphan Medicinal Product Landscape Guiding Principles and Policy Proposals by the European Expert Group for Orphan Drug Incentives (OD Expert Group).Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Access to Innovative Neurological Drugs in Europe: Alignment of Health Technology Assessments Among Three European Countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- The political economics of cancer drug discovery and pricing.Drug discovery today · 2020Review
- Critical Review of European Health-Economic Guidelines for the Health Technology Assessment of Medical Devices.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The economic evaluation which supports Health Technology Assessment (HTA) should inform policy makers of the value to society conferred by a given allocation of resources. However, neither the theory nor practise of economic evaluation satisfactorily reflect social values. Both are primarily concerned with efficiency, commonly conceptualised as the maximisation of utility or quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The focus is upon the service and the benefits obtained from it. This has resulted in an evaluation methodology which discriminates against groups and treatments which the population would like to prioritise. This includes high cost treatments for patients with rare diseases. In contrast with prevailing methods, there is increasing evidence that the public would prefer a fairness-focused framework in which the service was removed from centre stage and replaced by the patient. However methods for achieving fairness are ad hoc and under-developed. The article initially reviews the theory of economic evaluation and argues that its focus upon individual utility and efficiency as defined by the theory omits potentially important social values. Some empirical evidence relating to population values is presented and four studies by the first author are reviewed. These indicate that when people adopt the social perspective of a citizen they have a preference for sharing the health budget in a way which does not exclude patients who require services that are not cost effective, such as orphan medicinal products (OMP's) and treatments for patients with ultra-rare diseases (URD's).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.