IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The politics of health technology assessment in Poland

Listed author(s):
  • Ozieranski, Piotr
  • McKee, Martin
  • King, Lawrence
Registered author(s):

    First, to identify risks associated with the scientific evaluation of drugs considered for state reimbursement in Poland through exploring strategies of influence employed by multinational drug companies in relation to the Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AHTAPol). Second, to ascertain whether the outcomes of drug evaluation meet the interests of the public payer in reimbursing cost-effective drugs supported by robust pharmacoeconomic evidence.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851012002825
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Health Policy.

    Volume (Year): 108 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 178-193

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:108:y:2012:i:2:p:178-193
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.10.001
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Christopher Hood, 2007. "What happens when transparency meets blame-avoidance?," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 191-210, June.
    2. Hood, Christopher & Rothstein, Henry & Baldwin, Robert, 2004. "The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270019.
    3. Gordon Boyce & Cindy Davids, 2009. "Conflict of Interest in Policing and the Public Sector," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 601-640, September.
    4. Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Lehoux, Pascale & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2007. "Bringing `the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: From principles to practice," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 37-50, June.
    5. Kolasa, Katarzyna & Schubert, Sebastian & Manca, Andrea & Hermanowski, Tadeusz, 2011. "A review of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) recommendations for drug therapies issued between 2007 and 2009 and their impact on policymaking processes in Poland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 145-151.
    6. Ozierański, Piotr & McKee, Martin & King, Lawrence, 2012. "Pharmaceutical lobbying under postcommunism: universal or country-specific methods of securing state drug reimbursement in Poland?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(02), pages 175-195, April.
    7. Janine R. Wedel, 2003. "Clans, cliques and captured states: rethinking 'transition' in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 427-440.
    8. Sismondo, Sergio, 2008. "How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1909-1914, May.
    9. Lexchin, Joel & O'Donovan, Orla, 2010. "Prohibiting or 'managing' conflict of interest? A review of policies and procedures in three European drug regulation agencies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 643-647, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:108:y:2012:i:2:p:178-193. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    or ()

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.