ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2020
Are supplemental appraisal/reimbursement processes needed for rare disease treatments? An international comparison of country approaches.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reframing the value of reserve antibiotics: how ultra-orphan reimbursement pathways could offer fair and equitable access to new antibiotics.Health policy OPEN · 2026Article
- Using a lottery to resolve indeterminacy when allocating resources for drugs for rare diseases.Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- Evolution and synergy of healthcare security policies for rare diseases in China: a quantitative content analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A scoping review of challenges in pediatric health technology assessments with a focus on pharmaceutical interventions.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- Recommended methods for the collection of clinical expert judgment in rare diseases: Generating evidence to support reimbursement of orphan drugs.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- New opportunities for accessing promising non-oncological orphan drugs.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Navigating the unknown: how to best 'reflect' standard of care in indications without a dedicated treatment pathway in health technology assessment submissions.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2024Review
- Exploring the feasibility of using the ICER Evidence Rating Matrix for Comparative Clinical Effectiveness in assessing treatment benefit and certainty in the clinical evidence on orphan therapies for paediatric indications.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Article
- Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases-A Machine Learning Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Rule of Prevention: a potential framework to evaluate preventive interventions for rare diseases.Journal of market access & health policy · 2023Article
- European union regulation of health technology assessment: what is required for it to succeed?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Article
- Assessing the value of orphan drugs using conventional cost-effectiveness analysis: Is it fit for purpose?Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Review
- An international comparative analysis of public reimbursement of orphan drugs in Canadian provinces compared to European countries.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
- Rare disease emerging as a global public health priority.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- How Can We Optimize the Value Assessment and Appraisal of Orphan Drugs for Reimbursement Purposes? A Qualitative Interview Study Across European Countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Implementing Outcomes-Based Managed Entry Agreements for Rare Disease Treatments: Nusinersen and Tisagenlecleucel.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Essential list of medicinal products for rare diseases: recommendations from the IRDiRC Rare Disease Treatment Access Working Group.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Article
- How to Value Orphan Drugs? A Review of European Value Assessment Frameworks.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Are supplemental appraisal/reimbursement processes needed for rare disease treatments? An international comparison of country approaches.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2020Article
- A multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) applied to three long-term prophylactic treatments for hereditary angioedema in Spain.Global & regional health technology assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is increasing recognition that conventional appraisal approaches may be unsuitable for assessing the value rare disease treatments (RDTs). This research examines what supplemental appraisal/reimbursement processes for RDTs are used internationally and how they can be characterised. A qualitative research design was used that included (1) documentation of country appraisal/reimbursement processes for RDTs via questionnaires, desk research and iterative interactions with country experts to produce country vignettes, and (2) a cross-country analysis of these processes to identify and characterise features in supplemental processes for RDTs, and compare them to countries without supplemental processes.
resultsThirty-two of the 37 invited countries participated in this research. Forty-one percent (13/32) use supplemental processes for RDTs. Their level of integration within standard processes ranged from low to high, characterised by whether they are separate or partially separate from the standard process, adapted or accelerated standard processes, or standard processes that may be applied to RDTs. They are characterised by features implemented throughout the appraisal process. These features are mechanisms that allow application of different standards to assess the value of the medicine, support to the appraisal/decision-making process, overcome the issues of lack of cost-effectiveness, or exempt from part of/the full appraisal/reimbursement process. They increase the likelihood of reimbursement by adjusting and/or foregoing part of the assessment process, or accepting to pay more for the same added benefit as for common conditions. A large proportion of countries with standard processes include one or more of these features (formally or informally) or are discussing potential changes in their systems.
conclusionsResults suggest revealed preferences to treat RDTs differently than conventional medicines. Some of the challenges around uncertainty and high price remain, but supplemental process features can support decision-making that is more flexible and consistent. Many of these processes are new and countries continue to adjust as they gain experience.
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.