ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2019
Pay less and spend more-the real value in healthcare procurement.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality measurement for cardiovascular diseases and cancer in hospital value-based healthcare: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Reporting and utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures in orthopedic research and practice: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Out-of-pocket pharmaceutical expenditure and potential misuse of public resources - analysis in the Italian context.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Understanding healthcare efficiency-an AI-supported narrative review of diverse terminologies used.BMC medical education · 2025Review
- Value-Based Healthcare in Cardiology: How to Integrate a more Comprehensive View into Medical Decision-Making?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Review
- Barriers and Enablers of Value-Based Procurement in Dutch Healthcare Providers.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- Links between accuracy and effectiveness of laboratory medicine equipment: use of the EUnetHTA core model to compare two analyzers by measuring HbA1c.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- From volume to value: Improving peri-operative elective pathways through a roadmap from fast-track orthopedic surgery.Health services management research · 2023Review
- Comparative Study of Medical Equipment Procurement in Selected Countries.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2022Review
- Value-Based procurement for medical devices: A scoping review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Prevalence and burden of orthopaedic implantable-device infections in Italy: a hospital-based national study.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
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
Healthcare performances have been for long evaluated according to outcomes and costs. What still needs to be defined is which outcomes are the most relevant to the patient, and which costs any supplier is capable to reduce, or increase, to the funder. If technical efficiencies during healthcare production and delivery may continue to evolve, the opportunities for further savings are likely to decrease. Major improvement could be achieved from better definition of outcomes that really matters to patients and stakeholders, that is measuring the real value. Many purchasers are shifting from a traditional approach based on single-unit cost-saving to a more holistic approach, encompassing long-lasting performance evaluation, including the highest possible number of stakeholders and wider sets of indicators. Value-based procurement (VBP) has been defined as achieving "outcomes that matter to people at the lowest possible cost". Although this approach may appear complicated in practice, it was already proven successful in different countries, medical and surgical applications, and has also been endorsed by some important international institutions. The scope of this review is to introduce VBP from a theoretical and an empirical level, referring to relevant practices and challenges which emerged in the current institutional, clinical and academic debate. VBP seems to be a promising solution to improve healthcare efficiency and fairness, provided a clear conception of what is value and a permanent collaboration between clinicians and scientists. When different dimensions of value (i.e., personal, technical, allocative and societal) are supported by well-designed study to identify the respective outcomes, it becomes easier to find better solutions in support of healthcare quality and sustainability.
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.