Budget impact analysis - Principles of good practice: Report of the ISPOR 2012 budget impact analysis good practice II task force

Value in Health

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 5-14

  Sullivan, Sean D ^a   Mauskopf, Josephine A ^b   Augustovski, Federico ^c   Jaime Caro, J ^d   Lee, Karen M ^e   Minchin, Mark ^f   Orlewska, Ewa ^g,h   Penna, Pete ⁱ   Rodriguez Barrios, Jose Manuel ^j   Shau, Wen Yi ^k  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b RTI HEALTH SOLUTIONS   (United States)

^c INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS AND HEALTH POLICY   (Argentina)

^d EVIDERA   (United States)

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

^f NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

^g Centre for Pharmacoeconomics   (Poland)

^h JAN KOCHANOWSKI UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

ⁱ Formulary Resources LLC   (United States)

^j Stryker   (Spain)

^k Center for Drug Evaluation   (Taiwan)

more..

Author keywords

budget impact analysis; cost calculator; economic evaluation; methodology; modeling

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; ASIA; BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DISEASE SEVERITY; EUROPE; FACE VALIDITY; GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NORTH AMERICA; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PACIFIC ISLANDS; PHARMACOECONOMICS; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REIMBURSEMENT; SOUTH AMERICA; STANDARDIZATION;

BUDGET IMPACT ANALYSIS; COST CALCULATOR; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; METHODOLOGY; MODELING;

ADVISORY COMMITTEES; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; BUDGETS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMIC; POLICY MAKING;

EID: 84892588228     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.08.2291     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. J.A. Mauskopf, S.D. Sullivan, and L. Annemans et al. Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices - Budget Impact Analysis Value Health 10 2007 336 347
2. M. Brosa, R. Gisbert, J.M. Rodríguez Barrios, and Soto J. Principios métodos y aplicaciones del análisis del impacto presupuestario en sanidad Pharmacoecon Spanish Res Artic 2 2005 65 79
3. J. Mauskopf Prevalence-based economic evaluation Value Health 1 1998 251 259
4. P. Trueman, M. Drummond, and J. Hutton Developing guidance for budget impact analysis Pharmacoeconomics 19 2001 609 621
5. E. Orlewska, and P. Mierzejewski Proposal of Polish guidelines for conducting financial analysis and their comparison to existing guidance on budget impact in other countries Value Health 7 2004 1 10
6. M. Nuijten, T. Mittendorf, and U. Persson Practical issues in handling data input and uncertainty in a budget impact analysis Eur J Health Econ 12 2011 231 241
7. L. Garattini, and K. van de Vooren Budget impact analysis in economic evaluation: a proposal for a clearer definition Eur J Health Econ 12 2011 499 502
8. O.U. Garay, J.E. Caporale, and A. Pichón-Riviere et al. Budgetary impact analysis in health: update with a model using generic approach Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica 28 2011 540 547
9. Department of Health and Human Services Panel on Antiretroviral Guidelines for Adults and Adolescents. Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-1-infected adults and adolescents. Available from: http://aidsinfo.nih.gov/ContentFiles/AdultandAdolescentGL.pdf. [Accessed March 27, 2012].
10. R. Goel, and K. Svivathsan Newer oral anticoagulant agents: a new era in medicine Curr Cardiol Rev 8 2012 158 165
11. J. Chang, and J. Sung Health plan budget impact analysis for pimecrolimus J Manag Care Pharm 11 2005 66 73
12. M.D. Danese, C. Reyes, and K. Northridge et al. Budget impact model of adding erlotinib to a regimen of gemcitabine for the treatment of locally advanced, nonresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer Clin Ther 30 2008 775 784
13. A. Dee, M. Hutchinson, and D. De La Harpe A budget impact analysis of natalizumab use in Ireland Ir J Med Sci 181 2012 199 204
14. D.G. Smith, A. Cerulli, and F.H. Frech Use of valsartan for the treatment of heart-failure patients not receiving ACE inhibitors: a budget impact analysis Clin Ther 27 2005 951 959
15. J. Mauskopf Meeting the NICE requirements: a Markov model approach Value Health 3 2000 287 293
16. M. Marchetti, M. Caruggi, and G. Colombo Cost utility and budget impact of third-generation aromatase inhibitors for advanced breast cancer: a literature-based model analysis of costs in the Italian National Health Service Clin Ther 26 2004 1546 1561
17. J.J. Caro, K.F. Huybrechts, and J.G. Xenakis et al. Budgetary impact of treating acute bipolar mania in hospitalized patients with quetiapine: an economic analysis of clinical trials Curr Med Res Opin 22 2006 2233 2242
18. J. Mar, M. Sainz-Ezkerra, and E. Miranda-Serrano Calculation of prevalence with Markov models: budget impact analysis of thrombolysis for stroke Med Decis Making 28 2008 481 490
19. T.T. Purmonen, P.K. Auvinen, and J.A. Martikainen Budget impact analysis of trastuzumab in early breast cancer: a hospital district perspective Int J Technol Assess Health Care 26 2010 163 169
20. E.G. Martin, A.D. Paltiel, R.P. Walensky, and B.R. Schackman Expanded HIV screening in the U.S.: what will it cost government discretionary and entitlement programs? A budget impact analysis Value Health 13 2010 893 902
21. J. Mar, A. Arrospide, and M. Comas Budget impact analysis of thrombolysis for stroke in Spain: a discrete event simulation model Value Health 13 2010 69 76
22. X. Colin, A. Lafuma, and D. Costagliola et al. Modelling the budget impact of darunavir in the treatment of highly treatment-experienced, HIV-infected adults in France Pharmacoeconomics 28 Suppl. 1 2010 183 197
23. J.J. Caro, A.H. Briggs, and U. Siebert et al. Modeling good research practices - overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force - 1 Value Health 15 2012 796 803
24. A.H. Briggs, M.C. Weinstein, and E. Fenwick et al. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force - 6 Value Health 15 2012 835 842
25. D.M. Eddy, W. Hollingworth, and J.J. Caro et al. ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practice Task Force. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force - 7 Value Health 15 2012 843 850
26. S. Arlandis, D. Castro, and C. Errando et al. Cost-effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation compared to botulinum neurotoxin or continued medical management in refractory overactive bladder Value Health 14 2011 219 228
27. E. Chiao, and K. Meyer Cost effectiveness and budget impact of natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis Curr Med Res Opin 25 2009 1445 1454
28. D. Husereau, M. Drummond, and S. Petrou et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) - explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force Value Health 16 2013 231 250