Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36191016›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

What are the impacts of increasing cost-effectiveness Threshold? a protocol on an empirical study based on economic evaluations conducted in Thailand.

Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, Ryota Nakamura, Hwee Lin Wee, Myka Harun Sarajan, Yi Wang, Budsadee Soboon, Jing Lou, Jia Hui Chai, Wannisa Theantawee, Jutatip Laoharuangchaiyot and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Wanrudee IsaranuwatchaiHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-8368-6065
Ryota NakamuraHitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study and Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan.
Hwee Lin WeeSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Myka Harun SarajanHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Yi WangSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Budsadee SoboonHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Jing LouSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jia Hui ChaiSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Wannisa TheantaweeFood and Drug Administration (FDA), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Jutatip LaoharuangchaiyotFood and Drug Administration (FDA), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Thanakrit MongkolchaipakFood and Drug Administration (FDA), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Thanisa ThathongFood and Drug Administration (FDA), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Pritaporn KingkaewHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Kriang TungsangaSubcommittee for Development of the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM), Bangkok, Thailand.
Yot TeerawattananonHealth Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-2217-2930
Ministry of Public Health · THNational University of Singapore · SGChulalongkorn University · THHitotsubashi University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEconomic evaluations have been widely used to inform and guide policy-making process in healthcare resources allocation as a part of an evidence package. An intervention is considered cost-effective if an ICER is less than a cost-effectiveness threshold (CET), where a CET represents the acceptable price for a unit of additional health gain which a decision-maker is willing to pay. There has been discussion to increase a CET in many settings such as the United Kingdom and Thailand. To the best of our knowledge, Thailand is the only country that has an explicit CET and has revised their CET, not once but twice. Hence, the situation in Thailand provides a unique opportunity for evaluating the impact of changing CET on healthcare expenditure and manufacturers' behaviours in the real-world setting. Before we decide whether a CET should be increased, information on what happened after the CET was increased in the past could be informative and helpful.

objectivesThis study protocol describes a proposed plan to investigate the impact of increased cost-effectiveness threshold using Thailand as a case study. Specifically, we will examine the impact of increasing CET on the drug prices submitted by pharmaceutical companies to the National List of Essential Medicine (NLEM), the decision to include or exclude medications in the NLEM, and the overall budget impact. MATERIALS AND DESIGNS: Retrospective data analysis of the impact of increased CET on national drug committee decisions in Thailand (an upper middle-income country) will be conducted and included data from various sources such as literature, local organizations (e.g. Thai Food and Drug Administration), and inputs from stakeholder consultation meetings. The outcomes include: (1) drug price submitted by the manufacturers and final drug price included in the NLEM if available; (2) decisions about whether the drug was included in the NLEM for reimbursement; and (3) budget impact. The independent variables include a CET, the variable of interest, which can take values of THB100,000, THB120,000, or THB160,000, and potential confounders such as whether this drug was for a chronic disease, market size, and primary endpoint. We will conduct separate multivariable regression analysis for each outcome specified above. DISCUSSION: Understanding the impact of increasing the CET would be helpful in assisting the decision to use and develop an appropriate threshold for one's own setting. Due to the nature of the study design, the findings will be prone to confounding effect and biases; therefore, the analyses will be adjusted for potential confounders and statistical methods will be explored to minimize biases. Knowledge gained from the study will be conveyed to the public through various disseminations such as reports, policy briefs, academic journals, and presentations.

Indexed as

Policy MakingCost-Benefit AnalysisPharmaceutical PreparationsRetrospective StudiesThailandPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID36191016
PMCPMC9529087
OpenAlexW4300689824

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.