IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v21y2020i1d10.1007_s10198-019-01103-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

HTA for pharmaceuticals in Europe: will the mountain deliver a mouse?

Author

Listed:
  • Livio Garattini

    (Institute for Pharmacological Research Mario Negri IRCCS)

  • Anna Padula

    (Institute for Pharmacological Research Mario Negri IRCCS)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-019-01103-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-019-01103-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-019-01103-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-019-01103-9?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. Garattini, Livio & van de Vooren, Katelijne & Curto, Alessandro, 2012. "Regional HTA in Italy: Promising or confusing?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 203-206.
    2. Livio Garattini & Gianluigi Casadei, 2008. "Health technology assessment: for whom the bell tolls?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(4), pages 311-312, November.
    3. Alessandro Curto & Katelijne de Vooren & Livio Garattini, 2017. "Market approval for drugs in the EU: time to change direction?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(8), pages 933-936, November.
    4. Andrea Lebioda & David Gasche & Franz-Werner Dippel & Karlheinz Theobald & Stefan Plantör, 2014. "Relevance of indirect comparisons in the German early benefit assessment and in comparison to HTA processes in England, France and Scotland," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-14, December.
    5. Banta, David, 2003. "The development of health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 121-132, February.
    6. Panos Kanavos & Aris Angelis & Michael Drummond, 2019. "An EU-wide approach to HTA: An irrelevant development or an opportunity not to be missed?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(3), pages 329-332, April.
    7. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2019. "Comment on: ‘The Impact of Hospital Costing Methods on Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Case Study’," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(10), pages 1301-1302, October.
    8. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2018. "Pharmaceutical pricing conundrum: time to get rid of it?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(8), pages 1035-1038, November.
    9. Aris Angelis & Ansgar Lange & Panos Kanavos, 2018. "Using health technology assessment to assess the value of new medicines: results of a systematic review and expert consultation across eight European countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(1), pages 123-152, January.
    10. Brousselle, Astrid & Lessard, Chantale, 2011. "Economic evaluation to inform health care decision-making: Promise, pitfalls and a proposal for an alternative path," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(6), pages 832-839, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2018. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis in Health Technology Assessment for Drugs: Just Another Illusion?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-4, February.
    13. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2019. "Conflict of interest disclosure: striking a balance?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 633-636, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Francesca Iandolo & Pietro Vito & Irene Fulco & Francesca Loia, 2018. "From Health Technology Assessment to Health Technology Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Kanavos, Panos & Visintin, Erica & Gentilini, Arianna, 2023. "Algorithms and heuristics of health technology assessments: A retrospective analysis of factors associated with HTA outcomes for new drugs across seven OECD countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    3. Elena Nicod, 2017. "Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four Europ," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(6), pages 715-730, July.
    4. Milena Vainieri & Francesca Ferrè & Stefania Manetti, 2021. "An Integrated Framework to Measure the Performance of Inter-Organizational Programme on Health Technology Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Fontrier, Anna-Maria & Kamphuis, Bregtje W. & Kanavos, Panos, 2023. "How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120537, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula & Nicholas Freemantle, 2021. "Pricing vaccines and drugs in Europe: worth differentiating?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1345-1348, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Wang, Yi & Rattanavipapong, Waranya & Teerawattananon, Yot, 2021. "Using health technology assessment to set priority, inform target product profiles, and design clinical study for health innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    9. Garattini, Livio & van de Vooren, Katelijne & Curto, Alessandro, 2015. "Cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab in metastatic breast cancer: Mainly a matter of price in the EU?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 212-216.
    10. Velasco Garrido, Marcial & Gerhardus, Ansgar & Røttingen, John-Arne & Busse, Reinhard, 2010. "Developing Health Technology Assessment to address health care system needs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 196-202, March.
    11. Riswandy Wasir & Sylvi Irawati & Amr Makady & Maarten Postma & Wim Goettsch & Erik Buskens & Talitha Feenstra, 2019. "Use of medicine pricing and reimbursement policies for universal health coverage in Indonesia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    13. Renske J. Hoefman & Job Exel & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2017. "Measuring Care-Related Quality of Life of Caregivers for Use in Economic Evaluations: CarerQol Tariffs for Australia, Germany, Sweden, UK, and US," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 469-478, April.
    14. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    15. Cyr, Pascale Renée & Jain, Vageesh & Chalkidou, Kalipso & Ottersen, Trygve & Gopinathan, Unni, 2021. "Evaluations of public health interventions produced by health technology assessment agencies: A mapping review and analysis by type and evidence content," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(8), pages 1054-1064.
    16. A. Chapman & C. Taylor & A. Girling, 2014. "Are the UK Systems of Innovation and Evaluation of Medical Devices Compatible? The Role of NICE’s Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP)," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 347-357, August.
    17. Bombard, Yvonne & Abelson, Julia & Simeonov, Dorina & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2011. "Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 135-144, July.
    18. Elias Asfaw Zegeye & Josue Mbonigaba & Sylvia Blanche Kaye & Thomas Wilkinson, 2017. "Economic Evaluation in Ethiopian Healthcare Sector Decision Making: Perception, Practice and Barriers," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 33-43, February.
    19. Livio Garattini & Alessandro Curto & Anna Padula, 2016. "Reimbursable drug classes and ceilings in Italy: why not only one?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(8), pages 923-926, November.
    20. Oriana Ciani & Bogdan Grigore & Rod S. Taylor, 2022. "Development of a framework and decision tool for the evaluation of health technologies based on surrogate endpoint evidence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 44-72, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education
    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:eujhec:v:21:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-019-01103-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.