Developing a center for comparative effectiveness information

Health Affairs

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2006, Pages

  Wilensky, Gail R ^a  

^a Proj HOPE Center for Health Affairs   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG SCREENING; ECONOMICS; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMATION CENTER; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; REVIEW; UNITED STATES;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG EVALUATION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INFORMATION CENTERS; INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (U.S.); MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); PRIVATE SECTOR; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY;

EID: 33845342866     PISSN: 02782715     EISSN: 02782715     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.25.w572     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. U.E. Reinhardt, "An Information Infrastructure for the Pharmaceutical Market," Health Affairs 23, no. 1 (2004): 107-112;
2. and P.M. Ellwood, A.C. Enthoven, and L. Etheredge, "The Jackson Hole Initiatives for a Twenty-first Century American Health Care System," Health Economics 1, no. 3 (1992): 149-168.
3. See, for example, A. Mitchell, "Update and Evaluation of Australian Guidelines: Government Perspective," Medical Care 34, no. 12 Supp. (1996): DS216-DS225;
4. and P.J. Neumann, "Evidence-based and Value-based Formulary Guidelines," Health Affairs 23, no. 1 (2004): 124-134.
5. G.F. Anderson et al., "Health Spending in the United States and the Rest of the Industrialized World," Health Affairs 24, no. 4 (2005): 903-914.
6. Regence Group, "Guidelines for Submission of Clinical and Economic Data Suggesting Formalizing Considerations," Version 1.2 (Seattle: Regence Group, 1997);
7. Regence Group, "Familiarizing Submission Guidelines," Version 2.0 (Seattle: Regence Group, 2002);
8. and Neumann, "Evidence-based and Value-based Formulary Guidelines."
9. D. Balekdjian and M. Russo, "Managed Care Mandate: Show Us the Value," Pharmaceutical Executive, September 2003, http://www.highbeam.com/ doc/1G1-108450162.html (accessed 17 October 2006).
10. AcademyHealth, Placement, Coordination, and Funding of Health Services Research within the Federal Government, September 2005, http://www. academyhealth.org/publications/placementreport.pdf (accessed 19 September 2006).
11. Placement, Coordination, and Funding of Health Services Research within the Federal Government, 2005, Ibid.
12. S.G. Morgan et al., "Centralized Drug Review Processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom," Health Affairs 25, no. 2 (2006): 337-347.
13. S.G. Morgan et al., "Centralized Drug Review Processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom," Health Affairs 25, no. 2 (2006): 337-347.Ibid.
14. S.G. Morgan et al., "Centralized Drug Review Processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom," Health Affairs 25, no. 2 (2006): 337-347.Ibid.
15. S.G. Morgan et al., "Centralized Drug Review Processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom," Health Affairs 25, no. 2 (2006): 337-347.Ibid.
16. AcademyHealth, Placement, Coordination, and Funding.
17. Placement, Coordination, and Funding.Ibid.
18. Placement, Coordination, and Funding.Ibid.
19. Institute of Medicine, "Roundtable on Evidence-based Medicine," 27 July 2006, http://www.iom.edu/?id=28186&redirect=0 (accessed 19 September 2006).
20. Examples of quick-turnaround reports from the IOM include the following: (1) Vaccinations and Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy - meeting date: 28-29 October 2002, release date: 6 October 2003;
21. Vaccine and Autism - meeting date: 9 February 2004, release date: 17 May 2004;
22. and (3) Review of the HIVNET 012 Perinatal HIV Prevention Study - meeting date: September 2004, release date: 7 April 2005, Sponsor: NIH.
23. AcademyHealth, Placement, Coordination, and Funding.