Pharmaceutical industry's perspective on health technology assessment

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 97-101

  Lothgren, Mickael ^a   Ratcliffe, Mark ^a  

^a European Health Economics (UK) Ltd   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost; Efficiency; Health technology assessment; Implementation barriers

Indexed keywords

COSTS; DRUG PRODUCTS; PATIENT TREATMENT; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ENGLAND; FRANCE; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA); HEALTH-CARE SYSTEMS; NETHERLANDS; WALES;

HEALTH CARE;

DRUG INDUSTRY; FRANCE; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH ECONOMICS; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; NETHERLANDS; REVIEW; SWEDEN; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 2442641464     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462304000868     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. ABPI. The costs of medicines-Good value for patients. ABPI Publication Brief. 2001; Ref: 528/01/6600X. Available at: www.abpi.org.uk. Accessed on February 17, 2003.
2. Berg M, van der Grinten T, Klazinga N. Technology assessments, priority setting, and appropriate care in Dutch health care. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:35-43.
3. Carlsson P. Health technology assessment and priority setting for health policy in Sweden. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:44-54.
4. Cookson R, McDaid D, Maynard A. Wrong SIGN, NICE mess: Is national guidance distorting allocation of resources. BMJ. 2001;323:743-745.
5. Crump B, Drummond MF, Alexander S, Devaney C. Economic evaluation in the United Kingdom national health service. In: Graf von der Schulenburg J-M, ed. The influence of economic evaluation studies on health care decision-making: A European survey. Amsterdam: I.O.S. Press; 2000.
6. Cutler DM, McCellan M. Is technological change in medicine worth it? Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20:11-29.
7. DiMasi JA, Caglarcan E, Wood-Armany M. Emerging role of pharmacoeconomics in the research and development decision-making process. Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19:753-766.
8. Drummond M, Cooke J, Walley T. Economic evaluation under managed care competition: Evidence from the UK. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:583-595.
9. Duthie T, Trueman P, Chancellor J, Diez L. Research into the use of health economics in decision making in the United Kingdom-Phase II. Is health economics for good or evil? Health Policy. 1999;46:143-157.
10. Gafni A, Birch S. NICE methodological guidelines and decision making in the national health service in England and Wales. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21:149-157.
11. Hoffmann C, Stoykova BA, Nixon J, et al. Do health-care decision makers find economic evaluations useful? The findings of focus group research in UK health authorities. Value Health. 2002;5:71-78.
12. Hutton J, Brown RE. Use of economic evaluation in decision-making: What needs to change? Value Health. 2002;5:65-66.
13. Kleinke JD. The price of progress: Prescription drugs in the health care market. Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20:43-60.
14. NICE. Technical guidance for manufacturers and sponsors on making a submission to a technology appraisal. NICE March 2001.
15. Orvain J, Xerri B, Matillon Y. Overview of health technology assessment in France. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:25-34.
16. Schubert F. Health technology assessment - The pharmaceutical Industry perspective. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:184-191.
17. Sculpher M, Drummond M, O'Brien B. Effectiveness, efficiency, and NICE. A NICE start but evidence costs money. BMJ. 2001;322:943-944.
18. Stevens A, Milne R. Health technology assessments in England and Wales. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:11-24.
19. Towse A, Pritchard C. National institute for clinical excellence (NICE): Is economic appraisal working? Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;20(Suppl 3):95-105.