Regulating the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices: A European perspective

Health Policy

Volumn 63, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 167-178

  Cookson, Richard ^a   Hutton, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b MEDTAP International   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Economic evaluation; Evidence based health care; Fourth hurdle; Medical devices; Pharmaceuticals

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST CONTROL; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EUROPE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; INFORMATION; INTERVIEW; LAW; LICENSING; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SCHOOL; ORGANIZATION; PROSPECTIVE PRICING; PUBLICATION; UNIVERSITY;

CLINICAL TRIALS; DEVICE APPROVAL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG EVALUATION; EUROPE; EUROPEAN UNION; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; INTERVIEWS; MARKETING; POLICY MAKING; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 0037307066     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00063-5     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Nuijten M. Pharmacoeconomics in European decision-making. Value in Health. 2:(5):1999;319-322.
2. Drummond M.F., Dubois D., Garattini L., Horisberger B., Jonsson B., Kristianse I., Le Pen C., Pinto C., Poulsen P., Rovira J., Rutten F., Graf von der Shulenburg M., Sintonen H. Current trends in the use of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research in Europe. Value in Health. 2:(5):1999;323-332.
3. Marx P. NICE in Germany? Health Economics in Prevention and Care. 1:(1):2000;73-77.
4. Shulenburg J.M., Hoffman C. Review of European guidelines for economic evaluation of medical technologies and pharmaceuticals. Health Economics in Prevention and Care. 1:(1):2000;2-8.
5. ABPI. Pharma Facts and Figures: How the Pharmaceutical Industry Contributes to the Health and Wealth of the Nation. London: Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, Whitehall, 2000 (www.abpi.org.uk).
6. Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care? British Medical Journal. 312:1996;1215-1218.
7. Drummond M.F., O'Brien B., Stoddart G.L., Torrance G.W. Methods For the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 1997;Oxford University Press, Oxford.
8. Earl-Slater A. The elderly, medicines and robust evidence from randomised control trials. Journal of Clinical Effectiveness. 3:(3):1998;105-111.
9. Edwards S.L., Lilford R.J., Braunholtz D., Thornton J., Kiaka S. Are randomised trials treatment? Evidence Based Health Policy and Management. 2:(1):1999.
10. Mason J., Drummond M., Torrance G. Some guidelines on the use of cost-effectiveness league tables. British Medical Journal. 306:1993;570-572.
11. Revicki D., Frank L. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in the real world: effectiveness versus efficacy studies. Pharmacoeconomics. 15:(5):1999;423-434.
12. Schwartz D., Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in clinical trials. Journal of Chronic Disease. 20:1967;637-648.
13. Buxton M., Drummond M., Hout B., Prince R., Sheldon T., Szucs T., Vray M. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Economics. 6:1997;217-227.
14. Maynard A., Bloor K. Regulating the pharmaceutical industry: pricing should be renegotiated to control research costs and encourage cost effectiveness. British Medical Journal. 315:1997;200-201.
15. Sykes R. Being a modern pharmaceutical company involves making information available on clinical trial programmes. British Medical Journal. 317:(7167):1997;1172-1180.
16. Roberts I. An amnesty for unpublished trials: one year on, many trials are unregistered and the amnesty remains open. British Medical Journal. 317:1998;763-764.
17. Rennie D., Luft H.S. Pharmacoeconomic analyses: making them transparent, making them credible. Journal of the American Medical Association. 283:(16):2000;2158-2160.
18. Hill S., Mitchell A.S., Henry D.A. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses: a review of submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Journal of the American Medical Association. 283:2000;2116-2121.
19. Coggan P. Cost to society must be assessed: NHS drugs company chief puts case for taking all factors into account. Financial Times, 25 October 1999.
20. Gold M.R., Siegel J.E., Russell L.B., Weinstein M.C. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. 1996;Oxford University Press, Oxford.
21. Drummond M.F., Torrance G.W., Mason J.M. Cost-effectiveness league tables: more harm than good? Social Science and Medicine. 37:(1):1993;33-40.
22. Freemantle N., Mason J. Not playing with a full DEC: why development and evaluation committee methods for appraising new drugs may be inadequate. British Medical Journal. 318:1999;1480-1482.
23. Williams A. Intergenerational equity: An exploration of the 'fair innings' argument. Health Economics. 6:(2):1997;117-132.
24. Maynard A., Cookson R. Money or your life: pharmaceutical regulation and the health-wealth trade-off. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 6:(3):2001;186-189.
25. Enthoven A. In Pursuit of an Improving National Health Service. 1999;Nuffield Trust, London.
26. Angel M. The pharmaceutical industry - to whom is it accountable? New England Journal of Medicine. 342:(25):2000;1902-1904.