IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Real World Evidence for Coverage Decisions: Opportunities and Challenges


  • Hampson, G.
  • Towse, A.
  • Dreitlein, B.
  • Henshall, C.
  • Pearson, S.


OHE Research Paper 18/01 - This paper sets out the potential opportunities and important challenges and limitations that must be addressed in considering options for using RWE to inform insurer coverage decisions. The primary purpose of developing the paper was to stimulate discussion at the 2017 ICER Policy Summit meeting. A [separate paper]( available that summarises the authors reflections and proposed ways forwards based on the discussions that were had at the meeting. RWE is already utilised for multiple purposes in the US and globally. The focus of the 2017 ICER Policy Summit was on RWE for HTA assessments and payer coverage decisions - both initial decisions and reassessments – and the majority of the paper focuses on this. Acceptance of an expanded future role for RWE is not universal, particularly if it is seen as reducing the amount of RCT evidence available. Among the challenges associated with RWE explored in this paper are - bias and confounding; incomplete data; data mining; access to data; and the lack of universally accepted methodological standards. Current uses of RWE can be strengthened by increasing the quality and credibility of RWE (via national registries, data repositories and strict protocols) and establishment of appropriate governance arrangements. Key opportunities for the future include use of innovative study designs that combine benefits of collecting data from real world settings while incorporating best practice methods (i.e. randomisation methods from traditional RCTs); real time monitoring of patients; and the development of adaptive regulatory pathways linked to coverage with evidence development.

Suggested Citation

  • Hampson, G. & Towse, A. & Dreitlein, B. & Henshall, C. & Pearson, S., 2018. "Real World Evidence for Coverage Decisions: Opportunities and Challenges," Research Papers 001997, Office of Health Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ohe:respap:001997

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Marta O. Soares & Jo C. Dumville & A. E. Ades & Nicky J. Welton, 2014. "Treatment comparisons for decision making: facing the problems of sparse and few data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 177(1), pages 259-279, January.
    2. repec:elg:eechap:17350_5 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. repec:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-018-0716-4 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item


    Judging value for money and improving decision making;

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ohe:respap:001997. 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: (Publications Manager). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.