Literature DB >> 10186456

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

M J Nuijten1, M J Brorens, Y A Hekster, A van der Kuy, J H Lockefeer, P A de Smet, G Bonsel, M H Pronk.   

Abstract

This article presents the first version of the reporting format for economic valuation that was created in 1995 by a multidisciplinary taskforce. The members of this taskforce come from a broad spectrum of backgrounds within the healthcare field and participated in the exercise voluntarily. The format presented should be understood as the preferred Dutch structure for the reporting of any study on economic evaluation. In view of the many areas of contention that exist within the field, this format only gives normative directions in those areas in which consensus exists, as evidenced by the current published international guidelines. A regular review and adaptation of this format will be needed to reflect advances in the field.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10186456     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199814020-00004

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


  8 in total

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

Authors:  G W Torrance; D Blaker; A Detsky; W Kennedy; F Schubert; D Menon; P Tugwell; R Konchak; E Hubbard; T Firestone
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

Authors:  K Clemens; R Townsend; F Luscombe; J Mauskopf; J Osterhaus; J Bobula
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  A proposal for Italian guidelines in pharmacoeconomics The Mario Negri Institute Centre for Health Economics.

Authors:  L Garattini; R Grilli; D Scopelliti; L Mantovani
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Economic analysis of health technologies and programmes. A Spanish proposal for methodological standardisation.

Authors:  J Rovira; F Antoñanzas
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Utilities and quality-adjusted life years.

Authors:  G W Torrance; D Feeny
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 2.188

6.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party.

Authors:  M F Drummond; T O Jefferson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-08-03

7.  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

8.  Are guidelines for peer-reviewing economic evaluations necessary? A survey of current editorial practice.

Authors:  T Jefferson; V Demicheli
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1995 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.046

  8 in total
  3 in total

1.  Expert judgement in pharmacoeconomic studies. Guidance and future use.

Authors:  C Evans; B Crawford
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Reporting format for economic evaluation. Part II: Focus on modelling studies.

Authors:  M J Nuijten; M H Pronk; M J Brorens; Y A Hekster; J H Lockefeer; P A de Smet; G Bonsel; A van der Kuy
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Adherence of pharmacoeconomic studies to national guidelines in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Jarir Atthobari; Jasper M Bos; Cornelis Boersma; Jacobus R B J Brouwers; Lolkje T W de Jong-van den Berg; Maarten J Postma
Journal:  Pharm World Sci       Date:  2005-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.