ArticleSociology of health & illness2025
The Political Sociology of NICE: Investigating Pharmaceutical Cost-Effectiveness Regulation in the UK.
Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The NHS and the pharmaceutical industry: High risk of harmful interactions.Future healthcare journal · 2025Article
- Editorial: Health and illness interactions.Frontiers in sociology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) was established a quarter of a century ago in 1999 to regulate the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceuticals (and other health technologies) for the NHS. Drawing on medical sociology theories of corporate bias, neoliberalism, pluralism/polycentricity and regulatory capture, the purpose of this article is to examine the applicability of those theories to NICE as a key regulatory agency in the UK health system. Based on approximately 7 years of documentary research, interviews with expert informants and observations of NICE-related meetings, this paper focuses particularly on NICE's relationship with the interests of the pharmaceutical industry compared with other stakeholder interests at the meso-organisational level. Consideration of the interaction between the UK Government and the pharmaceutical industry in relation to NICE is presented together with the analysis of revolving doors and conflicts of interest of NICE experts/advisors. The nature of policy changes over time (e.g. accelerated assessment pathways and industry fees for regulatory appraisals) and how they relate to the relevant stakeholder interests is also investigated. It is concluded that NICE is largely characterised by neoliberal corporate bias, though some elements of its organisation are also consistent with theories of capture, pluralism and polycentricity.
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.