When does NICE recommend the use of health technologies within a programme of evidence development?: A systematic review of NICE guidance

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 137-149

  Longworth, Louise ^a   Youn, Jihee ^a   Bojke, Laura ^b   Palmer, Stephen ^b   Griffin, Susan ^b   Spackman, Eldon ^b   Claxton, Karl ^b  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GREAT BRITAIN; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; RESEARCH; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84876266455     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-012-0013-6     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Carbonneil C, Quentin F, Lee-Robin SH. A common policy framework for evidence generation on promising health technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(Suppl 2):56-67.
2. Carlson JJ, Sullivan SD, Garrison LP, Neumann PJ, Veenstra DL. Linking payment to health outcomes: a taxonomy and examination of performance-based reimbursement schemes between healthcare payers and manufacturers. Health Policy. 2010;96(3):179-90.
3. Hutton J, Trueman P, Henshall C. Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(4):425-32.
4. McCabe CJ, Stafinski T, Edlin R, Menon D. Access with evidence development schemes: a framework for description and evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):143-52.
5. Stafinski T, McCabe CJ, Menon D. Funding the unfundable: mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):113-42.
6. Towse A, Garrison LP Jr. Can't get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help?: toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):93-102.
7. Tunis SR, Chalkidou K. Coverage with evidence development: a very good beginning, but much to be done. Commentary to Hutton et al. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23(4):432-5.
8. Chalkidou K, Walley T, Culyer A, Littlejohns P, Hoy A. Evidence-informed evidence-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008;13(3):167-73.
9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE; 2008.
10. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance. 2nd ed. London: NICE; 2008.
11. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Research recommendations process and methods guide. London: NICE; 2011.
12. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Patient access scheme liaison unit process guide. London: NICE; 2009.
13. Department of Health. Cost effective provision of disease modifying therapies for people with multiple sclerosis [HSC 2002/004]. London: Department of Health; 2002.
14. Briggs A, Ritchie K, Fenwick E, Chalkidou K, Littlejohns P. Access with evidence development in the UK: past experience, current initiatives and future potential. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):163-70.
15. Chalkidou K, Hoy A, Littlejohns P. Making a decision to wait for more evidence: when the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends a technology only in the context of research. J R Soc Med. 2007;100(10):453-60.
16. Dhalla IA, Garner S, Chalkidou K, Littlejohns P. Perspectives on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's recommendations to use health technologies only in research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(3):272-80.
17. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Citizens Council. Only in research. London: NICE; 2007.
18. Claxton K, Palmer S, Longworth L, et al. Informing a decision framework for when NICE should recommend the use of health technologies only in the context of an appropriately designed programme of evidence development. Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(46).
19. Claxton K, Palmer S, Longworth L, Bojke L, Griffin S, McKenna C, et al. Uncertainty, evidence and irrecoverable costs: informing approval, pricing and research decisions for health technologies [CHE research paper no. 69]. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2011.
20. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Immunosuppressive therapy for renal transplantation in children and adolescents [TA99]. London: NICE; 2006.
21. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain of neuropathic or ischaemic origin [TA159]. London: NICE; 2008.
22. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Inhaled insulin for the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes [TA113]. London: NICE; 2006.
23. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. The clinical and cost effectiveness of etanercept and infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile poly-articular idiopathic arthritis [TA36]. London: NICE; 2002.
24. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Liquid-based cytology for cervical screening [TA5]. London: NICE; 2000.
25. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on hearing aids for individuals with hearing impairment [TA8]. London: NICE; 2000.
26. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (CCBT) for the treatment of depression and anxiety [TA51]. London: NICE; 2002.
27. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Interferon alpha and ribavirin for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C [TA75]. London: NICE; 2004.
28. Chalkidou K, Lord J, Fischer A, Littlejohns P. Evidence-based decision making: when should we wait for more information? Health Aff (Millwood). 2008;27(6):1642-53.
29. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Technology appraisal decisions. London: NICE; 2012. http://www.nice.org.uk/newsroom/ nicestatistics/TADecisions.jsp. Accessed 28 Nov 2012.
30. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the single technology appraisal (STA) process. London: NICE; 2009.
31. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the single technology appraisal (STA) process. London: NICE; 2006.
32. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE; 2004.
33. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance. London: NICE; 2005.
34. Menon D, McCabe CJ, Stafinski T, Edlin R. Principles of design of access with evidence development approaches: a consensus statement from the Banff Summit. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):109-11.
35. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Supplementary advice to the Appraisal Committees. London: NICE; 2009.
36. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Report to the NICE Board: update on the application of the 'end-of-life' supplementary advice in health technology appraisals. London: NICE; 2009.