ReviewHealth economics review2026
Establishing multiple cost-effectiveness thresholds in Oman: a stakeholder-driven approach.
Review in Health economics review, 2026. 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.
- Methodological guidelines for Health Technology Assessment in Oman.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 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
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rising cost of new health technologies and limited healthcare budgets challenge health systems worldwide, including Oman. Local value judgments are crucial for informed decision-making. This study aims to establish a cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) framework for Oman, aligned with the country's economic status and healthcare priorities.
methodsThe key findings from a recent literature review on global CETs and their applications were shared and discussed during a multi-stakeholder workshop in March 2024. Presenting these findings has provided participants a broad understanding of global CET practices and highlighted the use of multiple thresholds across different settings. Afterwards, a survey was distributed, asking participants to anonymously vote on six key concepts: the basis for the threshold, the baseline threshold multiplier, the use of multiple thresholds, the criteria for multiple thresholds, the number of multipliers, and which criterion should receive the 3X multiplier. The results from this voting guided the design and final agreement on the threshold values.
resultsTwenty respondents supported adopting multiple CET values based on cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), linked to Oman's economic status. A baseline CET equal to 1x Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita was suggested. Participants recommended three different threshold multipliers to reflect policy priorities. A continuous multiplier (1-3x GDP), based on incremental QALY gains, was used to favor technologies with greater health gains. Additionally, a fixed multiplier of 2 was chosen for both orphan drugs and treatments for priority diseases. The resulting CET values reflect technical and expert consensus and do not include patient or public perspectives.
conclusionsIn Oman, the incremental cost per QALY gained should not exceed 1x GDP per capita for new health technologies that offer minimal health gains in common diseases. However, thresholds might increase to 12x GDP per capita for curative treatments in rare priority disease areas. It is recommended that CET values be reviewed and updated within three years, based on initial implementation experiences.
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.