IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v24y2015i1p1-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Causes For Concern: Is Nice Failing To Uphold Its Responsibilities To All Nhs Patients?

Author

Listed:
  • Karl Claxton
  • Mark Sculpher
  • Stephen Palmer
  • Anthony J Culyer

Abstract

ABSTRACT Organisations across diverse health care systems making decisions about the funding of new medical technologies face extensive stakeholder and political pressures. As a consequence, there is quite understandable pressure to take account of other attributes of benefit and to fund technologies, even when the opportunity costs are likely exceed the benefits they offer. Recent evidence suggests that NICE technology appraisal is already approving drugs where more health is likely to be lost than gained. Also, NICE recently proposed increasing the upper bound of the cost‐effectiveness threshold to reflect other attributes of benefit but without a proper assessment of the type of benefits that are expected to be displaced. It appears that NICE has taken a direction of travel, which means that more harm than good is being, and will continue to be, done, but it is unidentified NHS patients who bear the real opportunity costs. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Stephen Palmer & Anthony J Culyer, 2015. "Causes For Concern: Is Nice Failing To Uphold Its Responsibilities To All Nhs Patients?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(1), pages 1-7, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:24:y:2015:i:1:p:1-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Elamin Elbasha & Jagpreet Chhatwal, 2016. "Myths and Misconceptions of Within-Cycle Correction: A Guide for Modelers and Decision Makers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 13-22, January.
    2. Culyer, Anthony J., 2016. "Cost-effectiveness thresholds in health care: a bookshelf guide to their meaning and use," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(04), pages 415-432, October.
    3. Jessica Ochalek & James Lomas & Karl Claxton, 2015. "Cost per DALY averted thresholds for low- and middle-income countries: evidence from cross country data," Working Papers 122cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    4. Jessica Ochalek & Karl Claxton & Paul Revill & Mark Sculpher & Alexandra Rollinger, 2016. "Supporting the development of an essential health package: principles and initial assessment for Malawi," Working Papers 136cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    5. repec:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0606-1 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Elamin H. Elbasha & Jagpreet Chhatwal, 2016. "Myths and Misconceptions of Within-Cycle Correction: A Guide for Modelers and Decision Makers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 13-22, January.

    More about this item

    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:wly:hlthec:v:24:y:2015:i:1:p:1-7. 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: (Wiley Content Delivery) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.