A stated preference binary choice experiment to explore NICE decision making

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 685-693

  Tappenden, Paul ^a   Brazier, John ^a   Ratcliffe, Julie ^a   Chilcott, James ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH SERVICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; TECHNOLOGY;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ENGLAND; HEALTH SERVICES; HUMANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RESEARCH DESIGN; WALES;

EID: 34547223071     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200725080-00006     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. A guide to NICE. London: NICE, 2004: 1-34
2. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drummond M. A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Lancet 2002; 360: 711-5
3. Smith R. The failings of NICE. BMJ 2006; 321: 1363-4
4. Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgements. BMJ 2004; 329: 224-7
5. Rawlins MD. Scientific and social value judgements. London: NICE, 2004: 1-20
6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance. London: NICE, 2005: 1-37
7. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Supplementary evidence to the House of Commons Health Select Committee: Paper 2. London: NICE, 2002: 1-9
8. Devlin N, Parkin D, Gold M. WHO evaluates NICE. BMJ 2003; 327: 1061-2
9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods for technology appraisal. London: NICE, 2004: 1-71
10. Littlejohns P. Does NICE have a threshold? A response. In: Towse A, Pritchard C, Devlin N. Cost-effectiveness thresholds. London: King's Fund/Office for Health Economics, 2002: 31-7
11. Louviere J, Hensher D, Swait J. Stated choice methods: analysis and application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000
12. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004; 13: 437-52
13. Nord E. Cost-value analysis in health care: making sense out of QALYs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999
14. Jonsen AR. Bentham in a box: technology assessment and health care allocation. Law Med Health Care 1986; 14: 172-4
15. Le Grand J. Equity, health and health care. Soc Justice Res 1987; 1 (257): 257-74
16. Dolan P, Olsen JA. Distributing health care: economic and ethical issues. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002
17. Bryan S, Williams I, McIver S. Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals. Health Econ 2007; 16: 179-93
18. Johnson FR, Backhouse M. Eliciting stated preferences for health-technology adoption criteria using paired comparisons and recommendation judgements. Value Health 2006; 9 (5): 303-11
19. Ratcliffe J, Bekker H, Dolan P. The relative importance attached to access, equity and cost-effectiveness by people and organisations providing health services. NICE annual conference and exhibition; 2006 Dec 6-7; Birmingham
20. Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, et al. Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Soc Sci Med 2000; 50: 63-75
21. Dolan P, Tsuchiya A, Brazier J, et al. Social QALY project: summary [online]. Available from URL: http://www.shef.ac.uk [Accessed 2005 May 23]