Literature DB >> 10160481

Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Canadian Collaborative Workshop for Pharmacoeconomics.

G W Torrance1, D Blaker, A Detsky, W Kennedy, F Schubert, D Menon, P Tugwell, R Konchak, E Hubbard, T Firestone.   

Abstract

In 1994, Canada became the second country to release national guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. The guidelines were developed over a period of 18 months through an elaborate process of broad consultation with a wide variety of relevant stakeholders. The intent of the guidelines is to provide guidance to doers and users of studies, by laying out the general 'state of the art' regarding methods, and by providing specific methodological advice on many matters. The aim is to improve the scientific quality and integrity of studies, and to enhance consistency and comparability across studies. This article presents the Canadian guidelines, both in summary and in detail. Because the techniques of economic evaluation are widely applicable beyond pharmaceuticals, the guidelines will be of interest to researchers and decision makers in all fields of healthcare. Because the methods are not country specific, the guidelines will be of interest to those in other countries as well as in Canada.

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 10160481     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199609060-00008

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


  33 in total

Review 1.  Implications of basing health-care resource allocations on cost-utility analysis in the presence of externalities.

Authors:  R J Labelle; J E Hurley
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Principles of cost-effective resource allocation in health care organizations.

Authors:  M C Weinstein
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 2.188

Review 3.  The use of QALYs in health care decision making.

Authors:  G Loomes; L McKenzie
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Economic evaluation of lipid lowering--a feasibility test of the contingent valuation approach.

Authors:  M Johannesson
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents.

Authors:  A Mehrez; A Gafni
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1989 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 6.  Time preference for health in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  J Lipscomb
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 7.  A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  A S Detsky; I G Naglie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1990-07-15       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  QALYs, HYEs, and the loss of innocence.

Authors:  D G Fryback
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1993 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Cost-effectiveness league tables: more harm than good?

Authors:  M Drummond; G Torrance; J Mason
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 4.634

10.  Do patients' evaluations of a future health state change when they actually enter that state?

Authors:  H A Llewellyn-Thomas; H J Sutherland; E C Thiel
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  37 in total

Review 1.  Pharmaceutical policies in Canada: another example of federal-provincial discord.

Authors:  A H Anis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2000-02-22       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 2.  Socioeconomic evaluation in medicine in Europe. Core economic concepts.

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

3.  The revised Canadian Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals.

Authors:  J L Glennie; G W Torrance; J F Baladi; C Berka; E Hubbard; D Menon; N Otten; M Rivière
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Economic evaluation of a new acellular vaccine for pertussis in Canada.

Authors:  M Iskedjian; T R Einarson; B J O'Brien; J G De Serres; R Gold; I M Gemmill; N Milkovich; A Rosner
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  The limited incorporation of economic analyses in clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Joel F Wallace; Scott R Weingarten; Chiun-Fang Chiou; James M Henning; Andriana A Hohlbauch; Margaret S Richards; Nicole S Herzog; Lior S Lewensztain; Joshua J Ofman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Managing public payment for high-cost, high-benefit treatment: enzyme replacement therapy for Gaucher's disease in Ontario.

Authors:  J T Clarke; D Amato; R B Deber
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-09-04       Impact factor: 8.262

7.  Using economic evaluations to make formulary coverage decisions. So much for guidelines.

Authors:  A H Anis; Y Gagnon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Reporting format for economic evaluation. Part I: Application to the Dutch healthcare system.

Authors:  M J Nuijten; M J Brorens; Y A Hekster; A van der Kuy; J H Lockefeer; P A de Smet; G Bonsel; M H Pronk
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Measuring sensitivity in pharmacoeconomic studies. An integration of point-sensitivity and range-sensitivity.

Authors:  M J Nuijten; M Hardens
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Quality assessment of economic evaluations published in PharmacoEconomics. The first four years (1992 to 1995).

Authors:  M Iskedjian; K Trakas; C A Bradley; A Addis; K Lanctôt; D Kruk; A L Ilersich; T R Einarson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.