IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v119y2015i5p569-576.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European collaboration on relative effectiveness assessments: What is needed to be successful?

Author

Listed:
  • Kleijnen, Sarah
  • Toenders, Wil
  • de Groot, Folkert
  • Huic, Mirjana
  • George, Elisabeth
  • Wieseler, Beate
  • Pavlovic, Mira
  • Bucsics, Anna
  • Siviero, Paolo D.
  • van der Graaff, Martin
  • Rdzany, Rafał
  • Kristensen, Finn Børlum
  • Goettsch, Wim

Abstract

The objective of this study is to identify the possible barriers and critical success factors for the implementation of European collaboration in the field of relative effectiveness assessment (REA) of drugs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kleijnen, Sarah & Toenders, Wil & de Groot, Folkert & Huic, Mirjana & George, Elisabeth & Wieseler, Beate & Pavlovic, Mira & Bucsics, Anna & Siviero, Paolo D. & van der Graaff, Martin & Rdzany, Rafał , 2015. "European collaboration on relative effectiveness assessments: What is needed to be successful?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(5), pages 569-576.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:5:p:569-576
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.01.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851015000342
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.01.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adrian Levy & Craig Mitton & Karissa Johnston & Brian Harrigan & Andrew Briggs, 2010. "International Comparison of Comparative Effectiveness Research in Five Jurisdictions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 28(10), pages 813-830, October.
    2. Margreet Franken & Fredrik Nilsson & Frank Sandmann & Anthonius Boer & Marc Koopmanschap, 2013. "Unravelling Drug Reimbursement Outcomes: A Comparative Study of the Role of Pharmacoeconomic Evidence in Dutch and Swedish Reimbursement Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(9), pages 781-797, September.
    3. Hailey, David & Marshall, Deborah & Sampietro-Colom, Laura & Rico, Rosa & Granados, Alicia & Asua, Jose & Jonsson, Egon, 1998. "International collaboration in health technology assessment: a study of technologies used in management of osteoporosis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 233-241, March.
    4. Valérie Paris & Annalisa Belloni, 2013. "Value in Pharmaceutical Pricing," OECD Health Working Papers 63, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2020. "HTA for pharmaceuticals in Europe: will the mountain deliver a mouse?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(1), pages 1-5, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salas-Vega, Sebastian & Bertling, Annika & Mossialos, Elias, 2016. "A comparative study of drug listing recommendations and the decision-making process in Australia, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(10), pages 1104-1114.
    2. Maynou, Laia & Cairns, John, 2019. "What is driving HTA decision-making? Evidence from cancer drug reimbursement decisions from 6 European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 130-139.
    3. Maynou, Laia & Cairns, John, 2018. "What is driving HTA decision-making? Evidence from cancer drug reimbursement decisions from 6 European countries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 90877, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    5. Melanie Büssgen & Tom Stargardt, 2023. "10 Years of AMNOG: What is the Willingness-to-Pay for Pharmaceuticals in Germany?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 751-759, September.
    6. W. Dominika Wranik & Liesl Gambold & Natasha Hanson & Adrian Levy, 2017. "The evolution of the cancer formulary review in Canada: Can centralization improve the use of economic evaluation?," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 232-260, April.
    7. Sabine Vogler & Valérie Paris & Alessandra Ferrario & Veronika J. Wirtz & Kees Joncheere & Peter Schneider & Hanne Bak Pedersen & Guillaume Dedet & Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar, 2017. "How Can Pricing and Reimbursement Policies Improve Affordable Access to Medicines? Lessons Learned from European Countries," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 307-321, June.
    8. William C. N. Dunlop & C. Daniel Mullins & Olaf Pirk & Ron Goeree & Maarten J. Postma & Ashley Enstone & Louise Heron, 2016. "BEACON: A Summary Framework to Overcome Potential Reimbursement Hurdles," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(10), pages 1051-1065, October.
    9. Sun-Hong Kwon & Hea-Sun Park & Young-Jin Na & Chul Park & Ju-Young Shin & Hye-Lin Kim, 2021. "Price Reduction of Anticancer Drugs from 2007 to 2019 in South Korea: The Impact of Pharmaceutical Cost-Containment Policies," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 439-450, May.
    10. Rotar, Alexandru M. & Preda, Alin & Löblová, Olga & Benkovic, Vanesa & Zawodnik, Szymon & Gulacsi, Laszlo & Niewada, Maciej & Boncz, Imre & Petrova, Guenka & Dimitrova, Maria & Klazinga, Niek, 2018. "Rationalizing the introduction and use of pharmaceutical products: The role of managed entry agreements in Central and Eastern European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 230-236.
    11. Vogler, Sabine & Zimmermann, Nina & de Joncheere, Kees, 2016. "Policy interventions related to medicines: Survey of measures taken in European countries during 2010–2015," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(12), pages 1363-1377.
    12. Claude Montmarquette & Stéphanie Boulenger & Joanne Castonguay, 2014. "Les risques liés à la création de PHARMA-QUEBEC," CIRANO Project Reports 2014rp-05, CIRANO.
    13. Bae, Green & Bae, Eun Young & Bae, SeungJin, 2015. "Same drugs, valued differently? Comparing comparators and methods used in reimbursement recommendations in Australia, Canada, and Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(5), pages 577-587.
    14. Fischer, Katharina E. & Rogowski, Wolf H. & Leidl, Reiner & Stollenwerk, Björn, 2013. "Transparency vs. closed-door policy: Do process characteristics have an impact on the outcomes of coverage decisions? A statistical analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 187-196.
    15. Fernando Antoñanzas & Robert Terkola & Maarten Postma, 2016. "The Value of Medicines: A Crucial but Vague Concept," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(12), pages 1227-1239, December.
    16. Afschin Gandjour, 2016. "Limiting Free Pricing of New Innovative Drugs After Launch: A Necessity for Payers?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 507-509, October.
    17. Gabriele Palozzi & Sandro Brunelli & Camilla Falivena, 2018. "Higher Sustainability and Lower Opportunistic Behaviour in Healthcare: A New Framework for Performing Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Melanie Büssgen & Tom Stargardt, 2023. "Does health technology assessment compromise access to pharmaceuticals?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(3), pages 437-451, April.
    19. Eun-Young Bae & Hui Jeong Kim & Hye-Jae Lee & Junho Jang & Seung Min Lee & Yunkyung Jung & Nari Yoon & Tae Kyung Kim & Kookhee Kim & Bong-Min Yang, 2018. "Role of economic evidence in coverage decision-making in South Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-12, October.
    20. Anna Hobbins & Luke Barry & Dan Kelleher & Koonal Shah & Nancy Devlin & Juan Manuel Ramos Goni & Ciaran O’Neill, 2018. "Utility Values for Health States in Ireland: A Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(11), pages 1345-1353, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:5:p:569-576. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.