ArticleBMC public health2025
Multi-criteria decision analysis of value evaluation of rare disease medical insurance drugs in China.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patient preferences and willingness-to-pay for therapy in generalized myasthenia gravis: a large-scale discrete choice experiment in China.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccording to the selection criteria outlined in China's current basic medical insurance system, the majority of drugs for rare diseases fail to meet the requirements for inclusion. Consequently, patients with rare diseases lack sufficient protection for their fundamental rights to life and health. The purpose of this paper is to explore the construction of a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) system for the inclusion of rare disease drugs in medical insurance.
methodsA preliminary evaluation system was constructed through a systematic literature review, followed by the establishment of a formal evaluation system through expert investigation. Based on the formal system, expert surveys were conducted to score the system attributes, and the pairwise comparison method was used to calculate the weight contribution value of each attribute in the system. The robustness of the system was tested using the bootstrap method.
resultsA multi-criteria decision value evaluation system for the inclusion of rare disease drugs in medical insurance, comprising four primary attributes and 16 secondary attributes, was developed. The four primary attributes and their respective weight contributions are as follows: disease-related aspects (26.6%), treatment-related aspects (25.8%), economic-related aspects (24.0%), and social-related aspects (23.6%). Bootstrap validation confirmed the stability of the system results (p < 0.05).
conclusionThis study initially constructed a value evaluation system for the inclusion of rare disease drugs in medical insurance, based on MCDA and multi-stakeholder perspectives. However, the system relied heavily on expert opinions and lacks empirical analysis. Given the complexity of real-world applications, further validation is necessary to assess the system's applicability and feasibility.
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.