Systematic reviews and economic evaluations conducted for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom: A game of two halves?

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 146-150

  Drummond, Michael F ^a   Iglesias, Cynthia P ^a   Cooper, Nicola J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness analysis; Health policy; Meta analysis

Indexed keywords

HEALTH POLICY; META-ANALYSIS;

COST EFFECTIVENESS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

HEALTH CARE;

ANALYTICAL RESEARCH; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SURVIVAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 42049086364     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462308080203     Document Type: Review

References (10)

1. Barbieri M, Drummond MF, Puig Junoy J, Casado Gomez MA, Blasco Segura PB, Poveda Andres JL. A critical appraisal of pharmacoeconomic studies comparing TNF alpha antagonists for the rheumatoid arthritis treatment. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2007;7:613-626.
2. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ. 2002;21:271-292.
3. Bryant J, Loveman E, Chase D, et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of growth hormone in adults in relation to impact on quality of life: A systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6:1-106.
4. Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: An appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:245-250.
5. EuroQol Group. EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199-208.
6. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, et al. Multiattribute and single attribute functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 System. Med Care. 2002;40:113-128.
7. Hanratty B, Craig D, Nixon J, Rice S, Christie J, Drummond MF. Are the best available clinical effectiveness data used in economic evaluations of drug therapies? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12:138-141.
8. King S, Griffin S, Hodges Z, et al. A systematic review and economic model of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of methylphenidate, clexamfetamine and amoxetine for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10:1-62.
9. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE; 2004.
10. Turner D, Wailoo A, Nicholson K, Cooper N, Sutton A, Abrams K. Systematic review and economic decision modelling for the prevention and treatment of influenza A and B. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:1-182.