Sentence first, verdict afterwards: Using value of information analysis to inform decisions about pharmacogenomic test adoption and research

Current Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 167-170

  Husereau, Don ^a  

^a CANADIAN AGENCY FOR DRUGS AND TECHNOLOGIES IN HEALTH   (Canada)

Author keywords

Decision analysis; Genetic tests; Personalized medicine; Pharmacogenomics; Reimbursement; Research priority setting; Uncertainty; Value of information analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PHARMACOGENOMICS;

EID: 78649305492     PISSN: 18756921     EISSN: 18756913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/187569210792246335     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Baron J, Beattie J, Hershey J. Heuristics and biases in diagnostic reasoning II. Congruence, information and certainty. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc 1988; 42: 88-10.
2. Skov RB, Sherman SJ. Information-gathering processes: Diagnosticity, hypothesis-confirmatory strategies, and perceived hypothesis confirmation. J Exp Soc Psychol 1986; 22(2): 93-21.
3. Simon J, Gray A, Clarke P, et al. Diabetes Glycaemic Education and Monitoring Trial Group. Cost effectiveness of self monitoring of blood glucose in patients with non-insulin treated type 2 diabe- tes: economic evaluation of data from the DiGEM trial. BMJ 2008; 336(7654): 1177-80.
4. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science 1968; 162: 1243-8.
5. Ramsey SD, Schickedanz A. How should we define value in cancer care? Oncologist 2010; 15: 1-4.
6. Ramsey SD, Veenstra DL, Garrison LP Jr, et al. Toward evidence- based assessment for coverage and reimbursement of laboratory- based diagnostic and genetic tests. Am J Manag Care 2006; 12(4): 197-202.
7. Teutsch SM, Bradley LA, Palomaki GE, et al. The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initia- tive: methods of the EGAPP Working Group. Genet Med 2009; 11(1): 3-14.
8. McGregor M, Brophy JM. End-user involvement in health technol- ogy assessment (HTA) development: A way to increase impact. Int J Tech Assess Health Care 2005; 21(2): 263-7.
9. Yokota F, Thompson KM. Value of Information literature analysis: A review of applications in health risk management. Med Decis Making 2004; 24: 287-98.
10. Phelps CE, Mushlin AI. Focusing technology assessment using medical decision theory. Med Decis Making 1988; 8: 279-89.
11. Miller P. Role of Pharmacoeconomic analysis in R&D decision making - when, where, how? Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23(1): 1-12.
12. Schmidt C. Researchers consider Value-of-Information theory for selecting trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102(3): 144-6.
13. Claxton K, Eggington S, Ginnelly L, et al. A pilot study of value of information analysis to support research recommendations for NICE. Centre for Health Economics Research Paper 4 2005; Available from: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/che/pdf/rp4.pdf [Accessed June 18, 2010].
14. Vallejo-Torres L, Steuten LMG, Girling AJ, et al. Integrating health economics modeling in the product development cycle of medical devices: A Bayesian approach. Int J Tech Assess Health Care 2008; 24(4): 459-64.
15. Hartz S, John J. Contribution of economic evaluation to decision making in early phases of product development: A methodological and empirical review. Int J Tech Assess Health Care 2008; 24(4): 465-72.
16. Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute of Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 2004; 329: 224-27.
17. Buxton MJ. How much are health-care systems prepared to pay to produce a QALY? Eur J Health Econ 2005; 6: 285-7.
18. Paci D, Ibarreta D. Economic and cost-effectiveness considerations for pharmacogenetics tests: an integral part of translational research and innovation uptake in personalized medicine. Curr Pharmacogenomics Person Med 2009; 7(4): 284-96.
19. Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999; 18: 341-64.