Practical issues in handling data input and uncertainty in a budget impact analysis

European Journal of Health Economics

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 231-241

  Nuijten, M J C ^a,b   Mittendorf, T ^c   Persson, U ^d  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b Ars Accessus Medica   (Netherlands)

^c LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^d LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Budget impact; Data source; Model

Indexed keywords

DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG;

ARTICLE; BUDGET; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; OFF LABEL DRUG USE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROGNOSIS; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STANDARD; TREATMENT FAILURE; UNCERTAINTY;

BUDGETS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MODELS, ECONOMIC; PREVALENCE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 79958040730     PISSN: 16187598     EISSN: 16187601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10198-010-0236-4     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment, http://www.inahta.org/HTA
2. Drummond, et al.: Int. J. Technol. Ass. Health Care 24(3), 244-258 (2008)
3. Australia Commonwealth Department of Health, Housing and Community Services. Guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Commonwealth Department, Canberra (1992)
4. AS Detsky 1993 Guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products: a draft document for Ontario and Canada Pharmacoeconomics 3 345 361 10.2165/00019053-199303050-00003
5. JM Graf von der Schulenburg W Greiner F Jost N Klusen M Kubin R Leidl T Mittendorf H Rebscher O Schoeffski C Vauth T Volmer S Wahler J Wasem C Weber the Hanover Consensus Group 2008 German recommendations on health economic evaluation: third and updated version of the Hanover consensus Value Health 11 4 539 544 18194408 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00301.x (Pubitemid 352032814)
6. JA Mauskopf SD Sullivan L Annemans J Caro CD Mullins M Nuijten E Orlewska J Watkins P Trueman 2007 Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices-budget impact analysis Value Health 10 5 336 347 17888098 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007. 00187.x (Pubitemid 47481105)
7. Weinstein, M.C., Fineberg, H.V.: Clinical Decision Analysis, pp. 228-265. Saunders, Philadelphia (1980)
8. MJ Nuijten F Rutten 2002 Combining a budgetary-impact analysis and a cost-effectiveness analysis using decision-analytic modelling techniques Pharmacoeconomics 20 12 855 867 12236807 10.2165/00019053-200220120-00006 (Pubitemid 35216498)
9. G Critchfield K Willard D Conelly 1986 Probabilistic sensitivity analysis methods for general decision models Comput. Biomed. Res. 19 254 265 3709122 10.1016/0010-4809(86)90020-0 1:STN:280:DyaL283hvFWkug%3D%3D
10. P Doubilet CB Begg MC Weinstein, et al. 1985 Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation Med. Decis. Mak. 5 157 177 10.1177/0272989X8500500205 1:STN:280:DyaL287nsVSgsg%3D%3D (Pubitemid 16130640)
11. http://www.cvz.nl/resources/cfh0010%20verzamel%20rapport-tcm28-21091.pdf
12. Survey use of biologicals. Ars Accessus Medica (2008)
13. ® Povonr 25004015. http://www.cvz.nl/resources/cfh0509-cinacalcet-Mimpara-kcr-tcm28-18010.pdf
14. BJF Van den Bemt J Hegeman R Janknegt FH Van den Hoogen HB Benraad J Van Limbeek 2006 Variability in dosing and costs of the TNFA-antagonists adalimumab and etanercept in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases Ann. Rheum. Dis. 65 Suppl II 507
15. MJC Nuijten P Engelfriet K Duijn G Bruijn D Wierz M Koopmanschap 2001 A cost-cost study comparing etanercept with infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis Pharmacoeconomics 19 10 1051 1064 11735673 10.2165/00019053-200119100-00006 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2Fjtlaqsw%3D%3D (Pubitemid 33701933)
16. Lipsey, R., Steiner, P., Purvis, D., et al.: Economics, 9th edn. Harper and Row, New York (1990)