Evaluating Frameworks That Provide Value Measures for Health Care Interventions

Value in Health

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 185-192

  Mandelblatt, Jeanne S ^a,b   Ramsey, Scott D ^c   Lieu, Tracy A ^d   Phelps, Charles E ^e  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c USA   (United States)

^d DIVISION OF RESEARCH   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness; multi attribute decision analysis; value frameworks

Indexed keywords

VACCINE;

ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; CARDIOLOGY; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INFECTION; ONCOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION ONCOLOGY; TAXONOMY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; PURCHASING; STANDARDS;

CARDIOLOGY; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; VACCINES; VALUE-BASED PURCHASING;

EID: 85013677504     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.013     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. [1] Lawler, M., French, D., Henderson, R., et al. Shooting for the moon or flying too near the sun? Crossing the value Rubicon in precision cancer care. Public Health Genomics 19 (2016), 132–136.
2. [2] Chandra, A., Shafrin, J., Dhawan, R., Utility of cancer value frameworks for patients, payers, and physicians. JAMA 315 (2016), 2069–2070.
3. [3] Swank, M.F., Brennan, L.K., Gentry, D., Kemner, A.L., Using frameworks to diagram value in complex policy and environmental interventions to prevent childhood obesity. J Public Health Manag Pract 21:Suppl. 3 (2015), S116–S120.
4. [4] Rogowski, W., Payne, K., Schnell-Inderst, P., et al. Concepts of “personalization” in personalized medicine: implications for economic evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 33 (2015), 49–59.
5. [5] Committee on Valuing Community-Based, Non-Clinical Prevention Programs; Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice; Institute of Medicine. An Integrated Framework for Assessing the Value of Community-Based Prevention. 2012, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
6. [6] Pronk, N.P., Hernandez, L.M., Lawrence, R.S., An integrated framework for assessing the value of community-based prevention: a report of the Institute of Medicine. Prev Chronic Dis, 10, 2013, 120323.
7. [7] Anderson, J.L., Heidenreich, P.A., Barnett, P.G., et al. ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 129 (2014), 2329–2345.
8. [8] Porter, M.E., What is value in health care?. N Engl J Med 363 (2010), 2477–2481.
9. [9] de Souza, J.A., Seiwert, T.Y., A value framework in head and neck cancer care. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book, 2014, e304–e309.
10. [10] Harris, R.P., Wilt, T.J., Qaseem, A., A value framework for cancer screening: advice for high-value care from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 162 (2015), 712–717.
11. [11] Thaker, N.G., Pugh, T.J., Mahmood, U., et al. Defining the value framework for prostate brachytherapy using patient-centered outcome metrics and time-driven activity-based costing. Brachytherapy 15 (2016), 274–282.
12. [12] Teckie, S., McCloskey, S.A., Steinberg, M.L., Value: a framework for radiation oncology. J Clin Oncol 32 (2014), 2864–2870.
13. [13] Yount, K.W., Turrentine, F.E., Lau, C.L., Jones, R.S., Putting the value framework to work in surgery. J Am Coll Surg 220 (2015), 596–604.
14. [14] Barnighausen, T., Bloom, D.E., Cafiero-Fonseca, E.T., O'Brien, J.C., Valuing vaccination. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 (2014), 12313–12319.
15. [15] Mitera, G., Earle, C., Latosinsky, S., et al. Choosing wisely Canada cancer list: ten low-value or harmful practices that should be avoided in cancer care. J Oncol Pract 11 (2015), e296–e303.
16. [16] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) with NCCN Evidence Blocks. Available from: http://www.nccn.org/evidenceblocks/pdf. [Accessed August 1, 2016].
17. [17] Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. Methods: the ICER approach. Available from: http//:icer-review.org/methodology/icers-methods/. [Accessed August 1, 2016].
18. [18] Schnipper, L.E., Davidson, N.E., Wollins, D.S., et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology statement: a conceptual framework to assess the value of cancer treatment options. J Clin Oncol 33 (2015), 2563–2577.
19. [19] Schnipper, L.E., Davidson, N.E., Wollins, D.S., et al. Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework: revisions and reflections in response to comments received. J Clin Oncol 34 (2016), 2925–2934.
20. [20] Cheung, M.C., Sabharwal, M., Chambers, A., et al. Multiple dimensions of value: evaluative frameworks for new cancer therapies. J Clin Oncol 34 (2016), 1428–1429.
21. [21] Hoch, J.S., Sabharwal, M., Informing Canada's cancer drug funding decisions with scientific evidence and patient perspectives: the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review. Curr Oncol 20 (2013), 121–124.
22. [22] Cherny, N.I., Sullivan, R., Dafni, U., et al. A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann Oncol 26 (2015), 1547–1573.
23. [23] Gold, M.R., Siegel, J.E., Russell, L.B., Weinstein, M.C., (eds.) Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, 1996, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
24. [24] Neumann, P.J., Sanders, G.D., Russell, L.D., et al. (eds.) Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, 2nd ed., 2017, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
25. [25] Sanders, G.D., Neumann, P.J., Basu, A., et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 316 (2016), 1093–1103.
26. [26] Marsh, K., IJzerman, M., Thokala, P., et al. Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making—emerging good practices: report 2 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 19 (2016), 125–137.
27. [27] International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Standard statistical evaluation tools for medical research. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/author-responsibilities—conflicts-of-interest.html. [Accessed October 10, 2016].
28. [28] Cochrane Training. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Available from: http://training.cochrane.org/handbook. [Accessed October 10, 2016].
29. [29] Madhavan, G., Phelps, C.E., Colwell, R.R., et al. In plain view: a transparent systems approach for enhancing health policy decisions. Bridge 46 (2016), 5–10.
30. [30] Kahneman, D., Thinking, Fast and Slow. 2011, Farrar, Strass and Giroux, New York, NY.
31. [31] Schnipper, L.E., Bastian, A., New frameworks to assess value of cancer care: strengths and limitations. Oncologist 21 (2016), 654–658.
32. [32] World Health Organization. Metrics: disability-adjusted life year (DALY). Available from: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/metrics_daly/en/. [Accessed August 1, 2016].
33. [33] Malone, D.C., Berg, N.S., Claxton, K., et al. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research comments on the American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework. J Clin Oncol 34 (2016), 2936–2937.
34. [34] Saaty, T.L., Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1 (2008), 83–98.
35. [35] Edwards, W., Barron, F.H., SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 60 (1994), 306–325.
36. [36] Barron, F.H., Barrett, B.E., Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Manag Sci 42 (1996), 1515–1523.
37. [37] Schmidt, K., Aumann, I., Hollander, I., et al. Applying the analytic hierarchy process in healthcare research: a systematic literature review and evaluation of reporting. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak, 15, 2015, 112.
38. [38] Madhavan, G., Sangha, K., Phelps, C., et al. (eds.) Ranking Vaccines: A Prioritization Framework, Phase I: Demonstration of Concept and a Software Blueprint, 2012, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
39. [39] Madhavan, G., Sangha, K., Phelps, C., et al. (eds.) Ranking Vaccines: A Prioritization Software Tool, Phase II: Prototype of a Decision-Support System, 2013, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
40. [40] Madhavan, G., Phelps, C., Rappuoli, R., et al. (eds.) Ranking Vaccines: Applications of a Prioritization Software Tool, Phase III: Use Case Scenarios and Data Framework, 2014, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
41. [41] Nelson, H.D., Fu, R., Cantor, A., et al. Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med 164 (2016), 244–255.
42. [42] Nelson, H.D., Pappas, M., Cantor, A., et al. Harms of breast cancer screening: systematic review to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med 164 (2016), 256–267.
43. [43] Henry J; Kaiser Family Foundation. 2015 Employer health benefits survey. Available from: http://kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2015-summary-of-findings/. [Accessed May 18, 2016].
44. [44] Shankaran, V., Jolly, S., Blough, D., Ramsey, S.D., Risk factors for financial hardship in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer: a population-based exploratory analysis. J Clin Oncol 30 (2012), 1608–1614.
45. [45] Angelis, A., Kanavos, P., Critique of the American Society of Clinical Oncology value assessment framework for cancer treatments: putting methodologic robustness first. J Clin Oncol 34 (2016), 2935–2936.
46. [46] Basch, E., Toward a patient-centered value framework in oncology. JAMA 315 (2016), 2073–2074.
47. [47] Li, J., Asabere, A., Kelly, S., et al. Application of ASCO value framework evaluations of net health benefit for oncology drugs launched in the United States between 2013 and 2015. Value Health, 18, 2015, A489.
48. [48] Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Evidence driven drug pricing project. Available from: http://www.drugabacus.org/. [Accessed August 1, 2016].
49. [49] World Health Organization. Choosing interventions that are cost-effective project. Available from: http://www.who.int/choice/cost-effectiveness/en/. [Accessed August 1, 2016].
50. [50] Ultsch, B., Damm, O., Beutels, P., et al. Methods for health economic evaluation of vaccines and immunization decision frameworks: a consensus framework from a European Vaccine Economics Community. Pharmacoeconomics 34 (2016), 227–244.
51. [51] Ultsch, B., Damm, O., Beutels, P., et al. Methods for health economic evaluations of vaccines—results from an international expert (workshop). Value Health, 17, 2014, A552.
52. [52] Ultsch, B., Damm, O., Perleth, M., Wichmann, O., Health economics in immunization decision-making—results from a systematic literature research and a stakeholder symposium in Germany. Value Health, 18, 2015, A569.
53. [53] Fayanju, O.M., Mayo, T.L., Spinks, T.E., et al. Value-based breast cancer care: a multidisciplinary approach for defining patient-centered outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 23 (2016), 2385–2390.
54. [54] Patel, M.S., Davis, M.M., Lypson, M.L., The VALUE framework: training residents to provide value-based care for their patients. J Gen Intern Med 27 (2012), 1210–1214.
55. [55] Phelps, C., Madhavan, G., Rappuoli, R., et al. Strategic planning in population health and public health practice: a call to action for higher education. Milbank Q 94 (2016), 109–125.