Literature DB >> 10155616

A comparative review of pharmacoeconomic guidelines.

P Jacobs1, J Bachynsky, J F Baladi.   

Abstract

We have reviewed 4 international sets of guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceutical products-those of the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, the Ontario Ministry of Health, and the England and Wales Department of Health. Comparison of these guidelines reveals that there are a number of differences between them, including disparities in outcome selection, costs and perspectives. These observations were attributed to differences in study purpose, conceptual approach, measurement techniques and value judgements. Uniformity can be achieved only in conceptual approach and measurement technique. Guidelines should be flexible to accommodate differences in the study purposes and value judgements of the analysts.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 10155616     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199508030-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  3 in total

1.  Discounting and health benefits.

Authors:  M Parsonage; H Neuburger
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Report from the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA). Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices.

Authors:  M C Weinstein; W B Stason
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1977-03-31       Impact factor: 91.245

  3 in total
  14 in total

Review 1.  Socioeconomic evaluation in medicine in Europe. Core economic concepts.

Authors:  K Berger; T D Szucs
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Standardisation of costs: the Dutch Manual for Costing in economic evaluations.

Authors:  Jan B Oostenbrink; Marc A Koopmanschap; Frans F H Rutten
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Trends in paediatric health economic evaluation: 1980 to 1999.

Authors:  W J Ungar; M T Santos
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 4.  Information barriers to the implementation of economic evaluations in Japan.

Authors:  Shuzo Nishimura; George W Torrance; Naoki Ikegami; Shunichi Fukuhara; Michael Drummond; François Schubert
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Sensitivity analysis in health economic and pharmacoeconomic studies. An appraisal of the literature.

Authors:  K E Agro; C A Bradley; N Mittmann; M Iskedjian; A L Ilersich; T R Einarson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Timing and timeliness in medical care evaluation.

Authors:  B S Bloom; A M Fendrick
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  International variation in resource utilisation and treatment costs for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Hubertus Rosery; Rito Bergemann; Stefanie Maxion-Bergemann
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Transparency of economic evaluations of health technologies.

Authors:  Joan Rovira
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  The role of pharmacoeconomics in formulary decision making in different hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Mohammed S Alsultan
Journal:  Saudi Pharm J       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 4.330

10.  An economic model of 2-hour post-dose ciclosporin monitoring in renal transplantation.

Authors:  Paul A Keown; Bryce Kiberd; Robert Balshaw; Shideh Khorasheh; Carlo Marra; Philip Belitsky; Zoltan Kalo
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.