ReviewJournal of comparative effectiveness research2026
Bridging the divide between health economics and outcomes research and biomedical investment: reflections from a health economist working in venture capital.
Review in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite investors' pivotal role in shaping biomedical innovation, interaction between the investment community and health economics and outcomes research professionals remains limited. Both communities seek to understand what society values and how to allocate resources accordingly, yet these conversations occur largely in parallel. This perspective article, written from the viewpoint of a health economist who joined a major biomedical investment firm, seeks to bridge that divide. Drawing on first-hand observations across three domains - profits, incentives and societal value; coverage, pricing and patient access; and public policy and innovation - it argues that health economics and outcomes research must reconnect with its economic foundations, incorporate insights from real-world investment practice, and update its methods to better inform policy, promote innovation and improve patient welfare in a market-based system.
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.