Literature DB >> 22717361

NICE's social value judgements about equity in health and health care.

Koonal K Shah1, Richard Cookson, Anthony J Culyer, Peter Littlejohns.   

Abstract

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) routinely publishes details of the evidence and reasoning underpinning its recommendations, including its social value judgements (SVJs). To date, however, NICE's SVJs relating to equity in the distribution of health and health care have been less specific and systematic than those relating to cost-effectiveness in the pursuit of improved total population health. NICE takes a pragmatic, case-based approach to developing its principles of SVJ, drawing on the cumulative experience of its advisory bodies in making decisions that command respect among its broad range of stakeholders. This paper aims to describe the SVJs about equity in health and health care that NICE has hitherto used to guide its decision making. To do this, we review both the general SVJs reported in NICE guidance on methodology and the case-specific SVJs reported in NICE guidance about particular health care technologies and public health interventions.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22717361     DOI: 10.1017/S1744133112000096

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ Policy Law        ISSN: 1744-1331


  9 in total

1.  Expanded HTA, Legitimacy and Independence Comment on "Expanded HTA: Enhancing Fairness and Legitimacy".

Authors:  Keith Syrett
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2016-09-01

2.  A comparative analysis of two contrasting European approaches for rewarding the value added by drugs for cancer: England versus France.

Authors:  Michael Drummond; Gerard de Pouvourville; Elizabeth Jones; Jennifer Haig; Grece Saba; Hélène Cawston
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Using health technology assessment to assess the value of new medicines: results of a systematic review and expert consultation across eight European countries.

Authors:  Aris Angelis; Ansgar Lange; Panos Kanavos
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-03-16

4.  Age-related references in national public health, technology appraisal and clinical guidelines and guidance: documentary analysis.

Authors:  Lynne F Forrest; Jean Adams; Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Stefanie Buckner; Nick Payne; Melanie Rimmer; Sarah Salway; Sarah Sowden; Kate Walters; Martin White
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 10.668

5.  Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns.

Authors:  Richard Cookson; Andrew J Mirelman; Susan Griffin; Miqdad Asaria; Bryony Dawkins; Ole Frithjof Norheim; Stéphane Verguet; Anthony J Culyer
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 6.  Accounting for equity considerations in cost-effectiveness analysis: a systematic review of rotavirus vaccine in low- and middle-income countries.

Authors:  Marie-Anne Boujaoude; Andrew J Mirelman; Kim Dalziel; Natalie Carvalho
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2018-05-18

7.  Appraising Drugs Based on Cost-effectiveness and Severity of Disease in Norwegian Drug Coverage Decisions.

Authors:  Eirik Joakim Tranvåg; Øystein Ariansen Haaland; Bjarne Robberstad; Ole Frithjof Norheim
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-06-01

8.  Sharing the British National Health Service around the world: a self-interested perspective.

Authors:  Kalipso Chalkidou; Jeanette Vega
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 4.185

Review 9.  A Rapid Review of COVID-19 Vaccine Prioritization in the U.S.: Alignment between Federal Guidance and State Practice.

Authors:  Vageesh Jain; Lara Schwarz; Paula Lorgelly
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.