Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39956595›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Evidence quality and uncertainties considered in appraisal documents of drugs for rare diseases in England and Germany: a data extraction protocol.

Lea Wiedmann, Ellen Nolte, John Cairns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Lea WiedmannDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK lea.wiedmann@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8259-0774
Ellen NolteDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2289-117X
John CairnsDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRare disease treatments (RDTs) promise considerable patient benefit but the evidence to demonstrate their value in health technology assessment (HTA) is often limited. HTA outcomes for RDTs vary across countries and there are differences in how uncertainty is dealt with by HTA agencies. Yet, there is limited comparative research assessing how different HTA agencies consider issues affecting evidence quality and uncertainty in RDT appraisals. This protocol describes a systematic and consistent approach for data extraction from RDT appraisal documents produced to inform decisions by HTA agencies. By documenting data extraction rules transparently, we ensure reproducibility and reliability of analyses of the extracted data. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will select RDT appraisals issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and the Federal Joint Committee (GBA) in Germany, using predefined inclusion criteria. We will extract data from appraisal documents in accordance with the rules set out in this protocol. We will analyse the extracted data to investigate how issues affecting evidence quality and uncertainty as documented in appraisals are considered, highlighting the similarities and differences between countries and identifying factors that are associated with HTA outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (reference number 29156). Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Indexed as

Rare DiseasesTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalEnglandGermanyHumansReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignUncertaintyDecision MakingHealth economicsHealth policyProtocols & guidelines

Identifiers

PMID39956595
PMCPMC11831311

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.