Guidelines for measuring the costs and consequences of adopting new pharmaceutical products: Are they on track?

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 18, Issue 2 SUPPL., 1998, Pages

  Pausjenssen, Anne M ^b   Detsky, Allan S ^a  

^a MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT; COST; MEASUREMENT; PHARMACOECONOMICS; REIMBURSEMENT; REVIEW;

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DECISION MAKING; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMICS, PHARMACEUTICAL; GUIDELINES; HUMANS;

EID: 0031950333     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9801800204     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Detsky AS. Using cost - effectiveness analysis for formulatory decision making: from theory into practice. Pharmacoeconomics. 1994;6:281-8.
2. Eisenberg JM. Why a journal of pharmacoeconomics? Pharmacoeconomics. 1992;1:2-4.
3. Drummond MF. The emerging government requirement for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Pharmacoeconomics. 1994;6:42-50.
4. Evans KG. Manufacturing consensus, marketing truth: guidelines for economic evaluations. Ann Intern Mod. 1995;123:59-60.
5. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Oxford Medical Publications, 1987.
6. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
7. Ontario Ministry of Health. Ontario Guidelines for Economic Analysis of Pharmaceutical Products. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Ministry of Health, Drug Programs Branch, 1994.
8. Commonwealth of Australia Department of Human Services and Health. Guidelines for the Pharmaceutical Industry on Preparation of Submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee Including Major Submissions Involving Economic Analysis. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1995.
9. Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals: Canada. 1st ed. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: CCOHTA, 1994.
10. Hillman A, Eisenberg JM, Pauly MV, et al. Avoiding bias in the conduct and reporting of cost-effectiveness research sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1362-5.
11. Kassirer JP, Angell M. The journal's policy on cost-effectiveness analyses (editorial). N Engl J Med. 1994;331:669-70.
12. Udvarhelyi IS, Colditz GA, Rai A, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in the medical literature: are the methods being used correctly? Ann Intern Med. 1992;116:238-44.
13. Bradley CA, Iskedjian M, Lanctot KL, et al. Quality assessment of economic evaluations in selected pharmacy, medical and health economics journals. Ann Pharmacother. 1995;29:681-6.