Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39512185›Full record

ArticleForum for health economics & policy2024

Valuing the Societal Impact of Medicines and Other Health Technologies: A User Guide to Current Best Practices.

Jason Shafrin, Jaehong Kim, Joshua T Cohen, Louis P Garrison, Dana A Goldman, Jalpa A Doshi, Joshua Krieger, Darius N Lakdawalla, Peter J Neumann, Charles E Phelps and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Forum for health economics & policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Action Plan to Better Approximate Reality in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Economic value of ribociclib in early breast cancer in the United States.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Improving access to innovation from international health technology assessment.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Jason ShafrinMann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8444-5979
Jaehong KimCenter for Healthcare Economics and Policy, FTI Consulting, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Joshua T CohenCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Louis P GarrisonThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Dana A GoldmanSchaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jalpa A DoshiDivision of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Joshua KriegerHarvard Business School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Darius N LakdawallaSchaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Peter J NeumannCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Charles E PhelpsEconomics, Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
Melanie D WhittingtonCenter for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Richard WillkeScintegral Health Economics, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA.

Funding

LA-Aging Diversity SupplementU01AG073697 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ESPELAND, MARK ANDREW, WAGENKNECHT, LYNNE E · 2021 to 2025
$7.1M
The Long-Term Benefits of Interventions to Improve T2D OutcomesR01DK107552 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI GOLDMAN, DANA P, HUCKFELDT, PETER · 2016 to 2019
$2.6M
Ensuring Access to Novel Alzheimer’s and Dementia Treatments: Evaluating Innovative Payment ApproachesR01AG062277 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI GOLDMAN, DANA P, LAKDAWALLA, DARIUS N. · 2018 to 2021
$2.3M
Evidence for Value-based Prescription Drug Plan for Diabetes, CVD and Chronic IllnessR01AG059234 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI JOYCE, GEOFFREY F · 2019 to 2021
$1.3M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG059234NIA NIH HHS R01 AG062277NIA NIH HHS U01 AG073697NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK107552
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study argues that value assessment conducted from a societal perspective should rely on the Generalized Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (GCEA) framework proposed herein. Recently developed value assessment inventories - such as the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness's "impact inventory" and International Society of Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Research (ISPOR) "value flower" - aimed to more comprehensively capture the benefits and costs of new health technologies from a societal perspective. Nevertheless, application of broader value elements in practice has been limited in part because quantifying these elements can be complex, but also because there have been numerous methodological advances since these value inventories have been released (e.g. generalized and risk-adjusted cost effectiveness). To facilitate estimation of treatment value from a societal perspective, this paper provides an updated value inventory - called the GCEA value flower - and a

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisBiomedical TechnologyHumansTechnology Assessment, Biomedicalcost-effectiveness analysisgeneralized cost-effectiveness analysishealth technology assessmentvalue assessment

Identifiers

PMID39512185
PMCPMC11567015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.