ArticleF1000Research2022
Facilitating bias in cost-effectiveness analysis: CHEERS 2022 and the creation of assumption-driven imaginary value claims in health technology assessment.
Article in F1000Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- After The QALY: Training for a New Start Paradigm in Health Technology Assessment.Innovations in pharmacy · 2023Article
- Post-Menopausal Quality of Life Claims: Overlooking the Requirements of Normal Science and Fundamental Measurement in ICER'S Cost-Effectiveness Assessment of Fezolinetant for Moderate to Severe Vasomotor Symptoms.Innovations in pharmacy · 2023Article
- Rejecting False Claims from Markov Simulations in Alzheimer's Disease.Innovations in pharmacy · 2023Article
- Evidentiary Standards for Patient-Centered Core Impact (PC-CIS) Value Claims.Innovations in pharmacy · 2022Article
- Formulary Submissions: Value Claims, Protocols and Outcomes Based Contracting in Rare Disease.Innovations in pharmacy · 2022Article
- Rasch Measurement and Patient Reported Value Claims: A Primer for Hemophilia.Innovations in pharmacy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current standards for health technology cost-effectiveness assessment rest on the creation of lifetime assumption-driven modeled simulations for imaginary pricing and consequent patient access recommendations. A recent
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.