Literature DB >> 9639335

Use of economic evaluation guidelines: 2 years' experience in Canada.

J F Baladi1, D Menon, N Otten.   

Abstract

Considerable effort has been expended in recent years in the development of methodology guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceutical products, driven in part by the desire to improve the rigour and quality of economic evaluations and to help decision making. Canada was one of the first countries to develop such guidelines and to encourage their use. This paper examines the extent to which the economic evaluations that were submitted to the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment in the last two years adhered to Canadian guidelines. The analytic technique employed by twelve studies as well as the comparator used, the perspective taken, the outcome measure selected, the cost items that were taken into consideration and the extent of sensitivity analyses that were performed are reviewed in this paper. It can be concluded that although studies have been of variable quality, the majority of them were well presented, complete and transparent, due in part to the guidelines. Except for the perspective of the analysis, guidelines were, in many respects, adhered to and did not restrict investigators to specific methodologies or specific techniques. They were also instrumental in ensuring a minimum set of standards.

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9639335     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(199805)7:3<221::aid-hec341>3.0.co;2-n

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  9 in total

1.  Health economics in the Canadian pharmaceutical industry.

Authors:  L Assiff; M R Pollock; P Manzi; B Faienza; D Menon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  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

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

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

4.  Developing the revised NICE appraisal technical guidance to manufacturers and sponsors: opportunity or threat?

Authors:  Rod S Taylor; John Hutton; Anthony J Culyer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Examining the quality of health economic analyses submitted to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Board in Sweden. The first year.

Authors:  Joakim Ramsberg; Stefan Odeberg; Andreas Engström; Douglas Lundin
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2004-12

6.  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

Review 7.  Costs of fragility hip fractures globally: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Authors:  S Williamson; F Landeiro; T McConnell; L Fulford-Smith; M K Javaid; A Judge; J Leal
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  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

Review 9.  Economic evaluations of vaccines in Canada: a scoping review.

Authors:  Ellen R S Rafferty; Heather L Gagnon; Marwa Farag; Cheryl L Waldner
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2017-05-05
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.