Methods for the estimation of the National Institute for Health and care excellence cost-effectiveness threshold

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 19, Issue 14, 2015, Pages 1-503

  Claxton, Karl ^a   Martin, Steve ^a   Soares, Marta ^a   Rice, Nigel ^a   Spackman, Eldon ^a   Hinde, Sebastian ^a   Devlin, Nancy ^b   Smith, Peter C ^c   Sculpher, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b Office of Health Economics   (United Kingdom)

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BUDGET; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MORTALITY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; AGE DISTRIBUTION; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CAUSE OF DEATH; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST OF ILLNESS; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; MALE; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; POPULATION DYNAMICS; PREMATURE MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; SEX RATIO; STANDARDS; STATISTICAL MODEL; TRENDS;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; CAUSE OF DEATH; COST OF ILLNESS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MALE; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; MORTALITY, PREMATURE; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; POPULATION DYNAMICS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SEX DISTRIBUTION; STATE MEDICINE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84923209923     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: 20464924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta19140     Document Type: Article

References (194)

1. Culyer A, McCabe C, Briggs A, Claxton K, Buxton M, Akehurst R, et al. Searching for a threshold, not setting one: the role of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. J Health Serv Res Policy 2007;12:56-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/135581907779497567.
2. McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold - what it is and what that means. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26:733-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00019053- 200826090-00004.
3. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technological Appraisal. London: NICE; 2008..
4. House of Commons Health Committee. NICE: First report of the Health Committee 2007-2008. HC27-I. London: The Stationery Office; 2008..
5. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technological Appraisal. London: NICE; 2004..
6. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004;13:437-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.864.
7. Gafni A, Birch S. Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies - a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem. CMAJ 1993;148:913-17..
8. Williams A. What Could be Nicer than NICE? OHE Annual Lecture. London: Office of Health Economics; 2004..
9. Drummond M, Torrance G, O'Brien BJ, Stoddard G. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd edn. Oxford University Press; 2005..
10. Birch S, Gafni A. Changing the problem to fit the solution: Johannesson and Weinstein's (mis) application of economics to real world problems. J Health Econ 1993;12:469-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-6296(93)90006-Z.
11. Johannesson M, Weinstein MC. On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 1993;12:459-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-6296(93)90005-Y.
12. Department of Health. A New Value-Based Approach to the Pricing of Branded Medicines - a Consultation. London: Department of Health; 2010..
13. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. First Report of the Health Committee 2007-2008. London: The Stationery Office; 2008..
14. Weinstein M, Zeckhauser R. Critical ratios and efficient allocation. J Public Econ 1973;2:147-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(73)90002-9.
15. Stinnett AA, Paltiel AD. Mathematical programming for the efficient allocation of health care resources. J Health Econ 1996;15:641-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(96)00493-6.
16. Epstein D, Chalabi Z, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Efficiency, equity and budgetary policies: informing decisions using mathematical programming. Med Decis Making 2007;27:128-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X06297396.
17. Abelson P. The value of life and health for public policy. Econ Record 2003;79:S2-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-4932.00087.
18. Bobinac A, van Exel NJ, Rutten FF, Brouwer WB. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year: the individual perspective. Value Health 2010;13:1046-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1524-4733.2010.00781.x.
19. Byrne MM, O'Malley K, Suarez-Almazor ME. Willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life-year in a study of knee osteoarthritis. Med Decis Making 2005;25:655-66. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0272989X05282638.
20. Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A, Williams A. QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ 2004;14:197-208. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1002/hec.924.
21. Green C, Gerard K. Exploring the social value of health-care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment. Health Econ 2009;18:951-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1414.
22. Groot W, van den Brink HM. The value of health. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:136..
23. Gyrd-Hansen D. Willingness to pay for a QALY. Health Econ 2003;12:1049-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.799.
24. Gyrd-Hansen D. Willingness to pay for a QALY - theoretical and methodological issues. Pharmacoeconomics 2005;23:423-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200523050-00002.
25. Johnson FR, Backhouse M. Eliciting stated preferences for health-technology adoption criteria using paired comparisons and recommendation judgments. Value Health 2006;9:303-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00119.x.
26. King JT, Tsevat J, Lave JR, Roberst MS. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year: Implications for societal health care resource allocation. Med Decis Making 2005;25:667-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X05282640.
27. Lieu TA, Ray GT, Ortega-Sanchez IR, Kleinman K, Rusinak D, Prosser LA. Willingness to pay for a QALY based on community member and patient preferences for temporary health states associated with Herpes Zoster. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27:1005-16. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2165/11314000-000000000-00000.
28. Mason H, Jones-Lee M, Donaldson C. Modelling the monetary value of a qaly: a new approach based on UK data. Health Econ 2009;18:933-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1416.
29. Pinto-Prades JL, Loomes G, Brey R. Trying to estimate a monetary value for the QALY. J Health Econ 2009;28:553-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.02.003.
30. Shiroiwa T, Sung YK, Fukuda T, Lang HC, Bae SC, Tsutani K. International survey on willingness-to-pay (wtp) for one additional qaly gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ 2010;19:422-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1481.
31. Yaesoubi R, Roberts SD. A game-theoretic framework for estimating a health purchaser's willingness-to-pay for health and for expansion. Health Care Manag Sci 2010;13:358-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10729-010-9135-6.
32. Polsky D. Does willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life-year bring us closer to a useful decision rule for cost-effectiveness analysis? Med Decis Making 2005;25:605-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X05283136.
33. Smith RD, Richardson J. Can we estimate the 'social' value of a QALY? Four core issues to resolve. Health Policy 2005;74:77-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.12.009.
34. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making 2000;20:332-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X0002000310.
35. Haninger K, Hammitt J. Willingness to Pay for Quality-Adjusted Life Years: Empirical Inconsistency Between Cost-effectiveness Analysis and Economic Welfare Theory. France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2006..
36. Baker R, Bateman I, Donaldson C, Jones-Lee M, Lancsar E, Loomes G, et al. Weighting and valuing quality-adjusted life-years using stated preference methods: preliminary results from the Social Value of a QALY Project. Health Technol Assess 2010;14(27)..
37. Claxton K, Walker S, Sculpher MJ, Palmer S. Appropriate Perspectives for Heath Care Decisions. CHE Research Paper 54. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2010..
38. Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ 2004;329:224-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7459.224.
39. Rawlins MD, Barnett D, Stevens A. Pharmacoeconomics: NICE's approach to decision-making. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010;70:346-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2009.03589.x.
40. Tappenden P, Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Chilcott J. A stated preference binary choice experiment to explore NICE decision making. Pharmacoeconomics, 2007;25:685-93. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2165/00019053-200725080-00006.
41. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Appraising Life Extending End-of-Life Treatments. London: NICE; 2009..
42. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Draft Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE; 2012..
43. House of Commons Health Committee. NICE Response to the First Report of Session 2007-2008. London: The Stationery Office; 2008..
44. House of Commons Health Committee. The Government's Response to the Health Select Committee's First Report of Session 2007-08 on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. London: The Stationery Office; 2008..
45. Braithwaite R, Roberts M. $50,000 per QALY: Inertia, Indifference, or Irrationality? Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, Atlanta, GA, 2004..
46. Birch S, Gafni A. The biggest bang for the buck or bigger bucks for the bang: the fallacy of the cost-effectiveness threshold. J Health Serv Res Policy 2006;11:46-51. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1258/135581906775094235.
47. Collier J. Parliamentary review asks NICE to do better still. BMJ 2008;336:53-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39454.496748.80.
48. Towse A. Should NICE's threshold range for cost per QALY be raised? Yes. BMJ 2009;338:268-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b181.
49. Appleby J, Devlin N, Parkin D, Buxton M, Chalkidou K. Searching for cost effectiveness thresholds in the NHS. Health Policy 2009;91:239-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.healthpol.2008.12.010.
50. Hughes DA, Ferner RE. New drugs for old: disinvestment and NICE. BMJ 2010;340:690-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c572.
51. Buxton M. How much are health-care systems prepared to pay to produce a QALY? Eur J Health Econ 2005;6:285-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10198-005-0325-y.
52. Elshaug A, Moss JR, Littlejohns P, Karnon J, Merlin TL, Hiller JE. Identifying existing health care services that do not provide value for money. Med J Aust 2009;190:269-73..
53. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization - tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 1992;146:473-81..
54. Birch S, Gafni A. Cost-effectiveness ratios - in a league of their own. Health Policy 1994;28:133-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(94)90031-0.
55. Drummond M, Torrance G, Mason J. Cost-effectiveness league tables - more harm than good. Soc Sci Med 1993;37:33-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(93)90315-U.
56. Appleby J, Devlin N, Parkin D. NICE's cost effectiveness threshold - how high should it be? BMJ 2007;335:358-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39308.560069.BE.
57. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. The Link Between Health Care Spending and Health Outcomes: Evidence from English Programme Budgeting Data. CHE Research Paper 24. York: Centre for Health Economics; 2007..
58. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. Further Evidence on the Link Between Health Care Spending and Health Outcomes in England. CHE Research Paper 32. York: Centre for Health Economics; 2007..
59. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. The Link Between Health Care Spending and Health Outcomes for the New English Primary Care Trusts. CHE Research Paper 42. York: Centre for Health Economics; 2008..
60. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. Does health care spending improve health outcomes? J Health Econ 2008;27:826-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2007.12.002.
61. Martin S, Smith P. How Good at Commissioning Health are English Primary Care Trusts? A Preliminary Statistical Analysis. Report to the Health Foundation. London: The Health Foundation; 2009..
62. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. Panel Data Estimates of the Link Between Health Care Spending and Health Outcomes for English Primary Care Trusts. York: Centre for Health Economics; 2010..
63. Martin S, Rice N, Smith P. Comparing costs and outcomes across programmes of health care. Health Econ 2012;21:316-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1716.
64. Cochrane AL, St. Leger AS, Moore F. Health service 'input' and mortality 'output' in developed countries. J Epidemiol Community Health 1997;51:344-8 [Reprinted from J Epidemiol Community Health 1968;32:200-5]. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.51.4.344.
65. Young FW. An explanation of the persistent doctor-mortality association. J Epidemiol Community Health 2001;55:80-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.55.2.80.
66. St Leger S. The anomaly that finally went away? J Epidemiol Community Health 2001;55:79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.55.2.79.
67. Nolte E, McKee M. Does Health Care Save Lives? London: The Nuffield Trust; 2004..
68. Gravelle HSE, Backhouse ME. International cross-section analysis of the determination of mortality. Soc Sci Med 1987;25:427-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(87)90167-5.
69. Cremieux PY, Ouellette P, Pilon C. Health care spending as determinants of health outcomes. Health Econ 1999;8:627-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199911)8:7<627:: AID-HEC474>3.0.CO;2-8.
70. Nixon J, Ulmann P. The relationship between health care expenditure and health outcomes. Evidence and caveats for a causal link. Eur J Health Econ 2006;7:7-18. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s10198-005-0336-8.
71. Bokhari FA, Gai Y, Gottret P. Government health expenditures and health outcomes. Health Econ 2007;16:257-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1157.
72. Moreno-Serra R, Smith PC. The Effects of Health Coverage on Population Outcomes: A Country-Level Panel Data analysis. Results for Development Institute, Washington DC, Working Paper, 2011..
73. Department of Health. NHS Finance Manual. December 2005 edition. URL: www.info.doh.gov. uk/doh/finman.nsf (accessed 12 January 2012)..
74. Department of Health. PCT Recurrent Revenue Allocations Exposition Book: 2009/10 and 2010/11. London: Department of Health; 2009..
75. Smith PC, Rice N, Carr-Hill R. Capitation funding in the public sector. J R Stat Soc Series A 2001;164:217-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-985X.00200.
76. Department of Health. Recurrent Resource Allocations: 2006/07, 2007/08. London: Department of Health; 2005..
77. National Audit Office (NAO). Good Governance Report: Review of Programme Budgeting. London: NAO; 2008..
78. Appleby J, Harrison T, Foot C, Smith A, Gilmour S. Explaining Variations in Primary Care Trusts' Spending on Cancer Services. London: The King's Fund; 2011..
79. Lakhani A, Olearnik H, Eayres DE. Compendium of Clinical and Health Indicators: Data Definitions and User Guide for Computer Files. London: National Centre for Health Outcomes Development; 2006..
80. Office for National Statistics. Census 2001: General Report for England and Wales. London: Office for National Statistics; 2005..
81. Shea J. Instrumental relevance in multivariate linear models: a simple measure. Rev Econ Stat 1997;79:348-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/rest.1997.79.2.348.
82. Stock JH, Yogo M. Testing for Weak Instruments in Linear IV Regression. NBER Technical Working Paper 284. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2002..
83. Ramsey JB. Tests for specification errors in classical linear least-squares regression analysis. J R Stat Soc Series B 1969;31:350..
84. Pesaran MH, Taylor LW. Diagnostics for IV regressions. Oxford Bull Econ Stat 1999;61:255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.00128.
85. Durbin J. Errors in variables. Rev Int Stat Inst 1954;22:23-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1401917.
86. Dixon J, Smith P, Gravelle H, Martin S, Bardsley M, Rice N, et al. A person based formula for allocating commissioning funds to general practices in England: development of a statistical model. BMJ 2011;343:d6608..
87. Curtis L. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2011. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2011..
88. Conley TG, Hansen CB, Rossi PE. Plausibly exogenous. Rev Econ Stat 2012;94:260-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00139.
89. Small DS. Sensitivity analysis for instrumental variables regression with overidentifying restrictions. J Am Stat Assoc 2007;102:1049-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/016214507000000608.
90. Office for National Statistics. Figures for England. National Life Tables 2006-2008. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health4/life-expec-at-birth-age-65/2004-06-to- 2008-10/statistical-bulletin.html#tab-National-life-expectancy (accessed 12 January 2013)..
91. Wailoo AD, Tosh SJ. The Incorporation of Health Benefits in Cost Utility Analysis Using the EQ-5D: Report by the Decision Support Unit. Sheffield: School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield; 2010..
92. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. A Social Tariff for EuroQol: Results from a UK General Population Survey. CHE discussion paper 138. York: University of York; 1995..
93. Currie CJ, McEwan P, Peters JR, Patel TC, Dixon S. The routine collation of health outcomes data from hospital treated subjects in the Health Outcomes Data Repository (HODaR): descriptive analysis from the first 20,000 subjects. Value Health 2005;8:581-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00046.x.
94. Cohen JW, Monheit AC, Beauregard KM, Cohen SB, Lefkowitz DC, Potter DE, et al. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: a national health information resource. Inquiry 1996;33:373-89..
95. Claxton K, Palmer S, Longworth L, Bojke L, Griffin S, McKenna C, 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)..
96. 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. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S0167-6296(98)00039-3.
97. Jackson C, Bojke L, Thompson S, Claxton K, Sharples L. A framework for addressing structural uncertainty in decision models. Med Decis Making 2011;31:662-74. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0272989X11406986.
98. Soares MO, Bojke L, Dumville J, Iglesias C, Cullum N, Claxton K. Methods to elicit experts' beliefs over uncertain quantities: application to a cost effectiveness transition model of negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulceration. Stat Med 2011;30:2363-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.4288.
99. Claxton K, Lindsay AB, Buxton MJ, Culyer AJ, McCabe C, Walker S, et al. Value based pricing for NHS drugs: an opportunity not to be missed? BMJ 2008;336:251-4. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1136/bmj.39434.500185.25.
100. Claxton K, Sculpher MJ, Carroll S. Value-based Pricing for Pharmaceuticals: Its Role, Specification and Prospects in a Newly Devolved NHS. CHE Research Paper 60. York: Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2011. URL: www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/ researchpapers/CHERP60_value_based_pricing_for_pharmaceuticals.pdf.
101. Maynard A, Street A. Seven years of feast, seven years of famine: boom to bust in the NHS? BMJ 2006;332:906-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.332.7546.906.
102. Office for Fair Trading. The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme. An OFT Market Study. VBP Report 2007. London: Office of Fair Trading; 2007..
103. Claxton K, Paulden M, Gravelle HSE, Brouwer W, Culyer AJ. Discounting and decision making in the economic evaluation of health care technologies. Health Econ 2011;20:2-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.1612.
104. Paulden M, Claxton K. Budget allocation and the revealed social rate of time preference for health. Health Econ 2011;24:612-18..
105. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). TA237: Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Oedema. London: NICE; 2011..
106. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Macular Oedema (Diabetic) - Ranibizumab (Rapid Review of TA237): Appraisal Consultation Document. London: NICE; 2012..
107. Novartis. Single Technology Appraisal (STA) Manufacturer Submission: Lucentis® (Ranibizumab) for the Treatment of Visual Impairment due to Diabetic Macular Oedema (DMO). Chamberley: Novartis; 2010..
108. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Technology Appraisal TA237: Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Oedema. URL: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/ TA237 (accessed 12 January 2013)..
109. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Rapid Review of TA237: Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Diabetic Macular Oedema. URL: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA/Wave23/41 (accessed 12 January 2013)..
110. Broome J. Trying to value a life. J Public Econ 1978;9:91-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 0047-2727(78)90029-4.
111. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001;16:606-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.
112. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:1092-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/ archinte.166.10.1092.
113. World Health Organization (WHO). Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012..
114. Barrett A, Roques T, Small M, Smith R. How much will Herceptin really cost? BMJ 2006;333:1118-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39008.624051.BE.
115. Brock DW. How much is more life worth? Hastings Cent Rep 2006;36:17-19. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1353/hcr.2006.0036.
116. Brouwer W, van Exel J, Baker R, Donaldson C. The new myth - the social value of the QALY. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26:1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200826010-00001.
117. Chambers JD, Neumann PJ, Buxton MJ. Does medicare have an implicit cost-effectiveness threshold? Med Decis Making 2010;30:E14-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X10371134.
118. Cohen J, Looney W. Re: how much is life worth: cetuximab, non-small cell lung cancer, and the $440 billion question. J Ntl Cancer Inst 2010;102:1044-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djq246.
119. Eichler HG, Kong SX, Gerth WC, Mavros P, Jonsson B. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: How are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge? Value Health 2004;7:518-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733. 2004.75003.x.
120. Gafni A, Birch S. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the silence of the lambda. Soc Sci Med 2006;62:2091-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.10.023.
121. Garber A, Phelps C. Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 1997;16:1-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(96)00506-1.
122. Grosse SD. Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2008;8:165-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1586/ 14737167.8.2.165.
123. Johannesson M, Meltzer D. Some reflections on cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 1998;7:1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199802)7:1<1::AID-HEC327>3.0. CO;2-U.
124. Johnson FR. Einstein on willingness to pay per QALY: is there a better way? Med Decis Making 2005;25:607-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272989X05283084.
125. Kaplan R, Bush J. Health-related quality-of-life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol 1982;1:61-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.1.1.61.
126. Laufer F. Thresholds in cost-effectiveness analysis - more of the story. Value Health 2005;8:86-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.08103.x.
127. Mauskopf J, Rutten F, Schonfeld W. Cost-effectiveness league tables - valuable guidance for decision makers? Pharmacoeconomics 2003;21:991-1000. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/ 00019053-200321140-00001.
128. Maynard A, Bloor K. The future role of NICE. BMJ 2010;341:1006-7. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1136/bmj.c6286.
129. Rascati KL. The $64,000 question - what is a quality-adjusted life-year worth? Clin Ther 2006;28:1042-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.07.002.
130. Towse A, Pritchard C, Devlin N. Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: Economic and Ethical Issues. London: Office of Health Economics, The King's Fund; 2002..
131. O'Brien BJ, Gertsen K, Willan AR, Faulkner LA. Is there a kink in consumers' threshold value for cost-effectiveness in health care? Health Econ 2002;11:175-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ hec.655.
132. Speight J, Reaney M. Wouldn't it be NICE to consider patients' views when rationing health care? BMJ 2009;338:297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b85.
133. Raftery J. Should NICE's threshold range for cost per QALY be raised? No. BMJ 2009;338:268-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b185.
134. Bridges JFP, Onukwugha E, Mullins CD. Healthcare rationing by proxy cost-effectiveness analysis and the misuse of the $50 000 threshold in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 2010;28:175-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/11530650-000000000-00000.
135. Mason AR, Drummond MF. Public funding of new cancer drugs: is NICE getting nastier? Eur J Cancer 2009;45:1188-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2008.11.040.
136. Ubel PA, Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Fendrick AM. What is the price of life and why doesn't it increase at the rate of inflation? Arch Intern Med 2003;163:1637-41. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1001/archinte.163.14.1637.
137. Vernon JA, Goldberg R, Golec J. Economic evaluation and cost-effectiveness thresholds signals to firms and implications for R&D investment and innovation. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27:797-806. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/11313750-000000000-00000.
138. World Health Organization (WHO). The World Health Report: Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life. Geneva: WHO; 2002..
139. Lee CP, Chertow GM, Zenios SA. An empiric estimate of the value of life: updating the renal dialysis cost-effectiveness standard. Value Health 2009;12:80-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1524-4733.2008.00401.x.
140. Gerdtham U, Jonsson B. International Comparisons of Health Expenditure. In Culyer A, Newhouse J, editors. Handbook of Health Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2000..
141. Fisher ES, Welch HG. Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care - how might more be worse? JAMA 1999;281:446-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.5.446.
142. Or Z. Exploring the Effects of Health Care on Mortality Across OECD Countries. OECD Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Paper No. 46. Paris: OECD; 2001..
143. Bound J, Jaeger DA, Baker RM. Problems with instrumental variables estimation when the correlation between the instruments and the endogenous explanatory variable is weak. JAMA 1995;90:443-50..
144. Staiger D, Stock JH. Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econometrica 1997;65:557-86..
145. Cragg JG, Donald SG. Testing identifiability and specification in instrumental variable models. Econometric Theory 1993;9:222-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266466600007519.
146. Wooldridge J. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge: The MIT Press; 2002..
147. Department of Health. Payment by Results: Tariff Information. London: Department of Health; 2007..
148. Department of Health. Unified Exposition Book: 2003/04, 2004/05 and 2005/06 PCT Revenue Resource Limits. London: Department of Health; 2005..
149. Dixon JY, Smith P, Gravelle M, Martin S, Bardsley M, Rice N, et al. A person based formula for allocating commissioning funds to general practices in England: development of a statistical model. BMJ 2011;343:d6608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d6608.
150. Kovandic T, Schaffer M, Kleck G. Estimating the Causal Effect of Gun Prevalence on Homicide Rates: A Local Average Treatment Effect Approach. Discussion paper 3589. Bonn: IZA; 2008..
151. Health and Social Information Centre. Provisional Monthly Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in England: A Guide to PROMs Methodology. Version 3, 2011. Health and Social Care Information Centre; 2011..
152. Office for National Statistics. Life Expectance at Birth and at Age 65 By Local Areas in the United Kingdom, 2004-06 to 2008-10. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health4/ life-expec-at-birth-age-65/2004-06-to-2008-10/statistical-bulletin.html#tab-National-lifeexpectancy (accessed 17 April 2014)..
153. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technological Appraisal. London: NICE; 2012..
154. Murray C, Lopez AE. The Global Burden of Disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, Harvard School of Public Health, World Bank; 1996..
155. World Health Organization (WHO). The Global Burden of Disease: 2004 Update. Geneva: WHO; 2008..
156. World Health Organization. The National Burden of Disease (NBD) Toolkit. URL: www.who.int/ healthinfo/global_burden_disease/tools_nbd_toolkit/en/index.html (accessed 29 April 2014)..
157. Mathers C, Bernard C, Iburg K, Inoue M, Ma Fat D, Shibuya K, et al. Global Burden of Disease in 2002: Data Sources, Methods and Results. GPE Discussion Paper No. 54. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003..
158. Health and Social Care Information Centre. Health Surveys for England. URL: www.hscic.gov. uk/article/3659/Health-Survey-for-England (accessed 29 April 2014)..
159. Appleby J, Devlin N. Getting the Most Out of PROMs: Putting Health Outcomes at the Heart of NHS Decision-Making. London: The King's Fund; 2010..
160. Gutacker N, Bojke C, Daidone S, Devlin N, Parkin D, Street A. Truly inefficient or providing better quality of care? Analysing the relationship between risk-adjusted hospital costs and patients' health outcomes. Health Econ 2013;22:931-47..
161. Feng Y, Parkin D, Devlin N. Assessing the Performance of the EQ-VAS in the NHS PROMs Programme. Research Paper 12/01. London: Office of Health Economics, The King's Fund; 2012..
162. NHS Information Centre. Provisional Monthly Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in England. Leeds: NHS Information Centre; 2012..
163. Public Health England. PCT CCG Spend and Outcome Factsheets and Tools (SPOT). URL: www.yhpho.org.uk/resource/view.aspx?RID=49488 (accessed 29 April 2014)..
164. Public Health England. NHS Atlas of Variation in Healthcare Services. URL: www.rightcare.nhs. uk/atlas/index.html (accessed 29 April 2014)..
165. NHS Choices. URL: www.nhs.uk/Pages/HomePage.aspx (accessed 10 October 2011)..
166. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CG82: Core Interventions in the Treatment and Management of Schizophrenia in Primary and Secondary Care. London: NICE; 2009..
167. Knapp M, Windmeijer F, Brown J, Kontodimas S, Tzivelekis S, Haro JM, et al. Cost-utility analysis of treatment with Olanzapine compared with other antipsychotic treatments in patients with schizophrenia in the Pan-European SOHO study. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26:341-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200826040-00006.
168. Davies LM, Barnes LM, Jones PB, Lewis S, Gaughran F, Hayhurst K, et al. A randomized controlled trial of the cost-utility of second-generation antipsychotics in people with psychosis and eligible for clozapine. Value Health 2008;11:549-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1524-4733.2007.00280.x.
169. Bagnall AM, Jones L, Ginnelly L, Lewis R, Glanville J, Gilbody S, et al. A systematic review of atypical antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(13)..
170. Barton GR, Hodgekins J, Mugford M, Jones PBB, Croudace T, Fowler D. Cognitive behaviour therapy for improving social recovery in psychosis: cost-effectiveness analysis. Schizophr Res 2009;112:158-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2009.03.041.
171. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CG90: Depression the Treatment and Management of Depression in Adults. London: NICE; 2009..
172. Lenox-Smith A, Greenstreet L, Burslem K, Knight C. Cost effectiveness of venlafaxine compared with generic fluoxetine or generic amitriptyline in major depressive disorder in the UK. Clin Drug Invest 2009;29:173-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00044011-200929030-00004.
173. Kendrick T, Peveler R, Longworth L, Baldwin D, Moore M, Chatwin J, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and lofepramine: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2006;188:337-45. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1192/bjp.188.4.337.
174. Hatziandreu EJ, Brown RE, Revicki DA, Turner R, Martindale J, Levine S, et al. Cost utility of maintenance treatment of recurrent depression with sertraline versus episodic treatment with dothiepin. Pharmacoeconomics 1994;5:249-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/ 00019053-199405030-00008.
175. Peveler R, Kendrick T, Buxton M, Longworth L, Baldwin D, Moore M, et al. A randomised controlled trial to compare the cost-effectiveness of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and lofepramine. Health Technol Assess 2005;9(16)..
176. Kendrick T, Chatwin J, Dowrick C, Tylee A, Morriss R, Peveler R, et al. Randomised controlled trial to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors plus supportive care, versus supportive care alone, for mild to moderate depression with somatic symptoms in primary care: the THREAD (THREshold for AntiDepressant response) study. Health Technol Assess 2009;13(22)..
177. Simon J, Pilling S, Burbeck R, Goldberg D. Treatment options in moderate and severe depression: decision analysis supporting a clinical guideline. Br J Psychiatry 2006;189:494-501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.105.014571.
178. Kaltenthaler E, Shackley P, Stevens K, Beverley C, Parry G, Chilcott J. A systematic review and economic evaluation of computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety. Health Technol Assess 2002;6(22)..
179. Kaltenthaler E, Brazier J, De Nigris E, Tumur I, Ferriter M, Beverley C, et al. Computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety update: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2006;10(33)..
180. Hollinghurst S, Peters TJ, Kaur S, Wiles N, Lewis G, Kessler D. Cost-effectiveness of therapist-delivered online cognitive-behavioural therapy for depression: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry 2010;197:297-304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.109.073080.
181. Mears A, Kendall T, Strathdee G, Sinfield R, Aldridge I. Progress on NICE guideline implementation in mental health trusts: meta-analyses. Psychiatrist 2008;32:383-7..
182. Rosenheck RA, Leslie DL, Sindelar J, Miller EA, Lin H, Stroup TS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of second-generation antipsychotics and perphenazine in a randomized trial of treatment for chronic schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 2006;163:2080-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/ appi.ajp.163.12.2080.
183. Lambert MT, Copeland LA, Sampson N, Duffy SA. New-onset type-2 diabetes associated with atypical antipsychotic medications. Prog Neuro-Psychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2006;30:919-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2006.02.007.
184. Dispensing Doctors Association. Patent Expiry 2010-11. URL: www.dispensingdoctor.org/ content.php?id=1335 (accessed 3 May 2012)..
185. Haas SJ, Hill R, Krum H, Liew D, Tonkin A, Demos L, et al. Clozapine-associated myocarditis: a review of 116 cases of suspected myocarditis associated with the use of clozapine in Australia during 1993-2003. Drug Saf 2007;30:47-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00002018- 200730010-00005.
186. Alvir JM, Lieberman JA, Safferman AZ, Schwimmer JL, Schaaf JA. Clozapine-induced agranulocytosis. Incidence and risk factors in the United States. N Engl J Med 1993;329:162-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199307153290303.
187. Crawford MJ, Killaspy H, Barnes TRE, Barrett B, Byford S, Clayton K, et al. Group art therapy as an adjunctive treatment for people with schizophrenia: multicentre pragmatic randomised trial. BMJ 2012;344:e846..
188. Kendall T. Treating negative symptoms of schizophrenia. BMJ 2012;344:e664..
189. Tarrier N, Barrowclough C, Porceddu K, Fitzpatrick E. The Salford Family Intervention Project: relapse rates of schizophrenia at five and eight years. Br J Psychiatry 1994;165:829-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.165.6.829.
190. Jarbrink K, Kreif N, Benedict A, Locklear J. Quality of life and drug costs associated with switching antipsychotic medication to once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate in patients with schizophrenia. Curr Med Res Opin 2009;25:709-16. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1185/03007990902738810.
191. Davies LM, Lewis S, Jones PB, Barnes TR, Gaughran F, Hayhurst K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of first- v. second-generation antipsychotic drugs: results from a randomised controlled trial in schizophrenia responding poorly to previous therapy. Br J Psychiatry 2007;191:14-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.106.028654.
192. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CG82: Schizophrenia (Update). London: NICE: 2009..
193. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CG90: Depression in Adults: The Treatment and Management of Depression in Adults. London: NICE; 2007..
194. Department of Health. A New Value-Based Approach to the Pricing of Branded Medicines: Government Response to Consultation. London: Department of Health; 2011..