ReviewPharmacoEconomics2025
The Use of Real-World Data for Estimating Relative Treatment Effects in NICE Health Technology Assessment Submissions: A Review.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Synthetic augmentation in ACL reconstruction may reduce re-rupture rates and increase return-to-sport rates: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Leveraging generative artificial intelligence for the development of non-interventional research study protocols: a proof-of-concept feasibility study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Use of RWD in the assessment of economic evaluations of innovative health products: lessons learned from the French National Authority for health (HAS).International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Budget Impact Projections in Bulgarian Health Technology Assessment: A Five-Year Validation Study (2020-2025).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- R WE ready for reimbursement? A round up of developments in real-world evidence relating to health technology assessment: part 18.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Article
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
This paper investigates the current use of real-world data (RWD) for estimating relative treatment effects in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) health technology assessment (HTA) submissions. This review included 64 HTA submissions, which accounted for approximately 11% of the total NICE HTA submissions between January 2016 and December 2023. The main sources of RWD considered in the submissions were disease registries and electronic health records. RWD were primarily used to provide an external control arm to enable comparisons within single-arm trials and to inform long-term treatment effects when extrapolating survival data beyond the trial follow-up. Adjustments for potential systematic differences between treatment groups have improved over time; however, approximately one-third of the submissions still relied on unadjusted treatment comparisons. We found that approximately 10% of NICE HTA submissions used RWD to directly inform treatment effects estimation. Over one-third of the submissions relied on naïve and/or unadjusted treatment comparisons, which may have introduced biases. To ensure that RWD provide sound evidence for HTA, submissions should follow published guidelines, including the NICE real-world evidence (RWE) framework.
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.