IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/fhecpo/v27y2024i1p29-116n1002.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing the Societal Impact of Medicines and Other Health Technologies: A User Guide to Current Best Practices

Author

Listed:
  • Shafrin Jason

    (Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA)

  • Kim Jaehong

    (Center for Healthcare Economics and Policy, FTI Consulting, Los Angeles, CA, USA)

  • Cohen Joshua T.

    (Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Garrison Louis P.

    (The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA)

  • Goldman Dana A.

    (Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA)

  • Doshi Jalpa A.

    (Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Krieger Joshua

    (Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Lakdawalla Darius N.

    (Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA)

  • Neumann Peter J.

    (Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Phelps Charles E.

    (Economics, Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA)

  • Whittington Melanie D.

    (Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Willke Richard

    (Scintegral Health Economics, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA)

Abstract

This study argues that value assessment conducted from a societal perspective should rely on the Generalized Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (GCEA) framework proposed herein. Recently developed value assessment inventories – such as the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness’s “impact inventory” and International Society of Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Research (ISPOR) “value flower” – aimed to more comprehensively capture the benefits and costs of new health technologies from a societal perspective. Nevertheless, application of broader value elements in practice has been limited in part because quantifying these elements can be complex, but also because there have been numerous methodological advances since these value inventories have been released (e.g. generalized and risk-adjusted cost effectiveness). To facilitate estimation of treatment value from a societal perspective, this paper provides an updated value inventory – called the GCEA value flower – and a user guide for implementing GCEA for health economics researchers and practitioners. GCEA considers 15 broader value elements across four categories: (i) uncertainty, (ii) dynamics, (iii) beneficiary, and (iv) additional value components. The uncertainty category incorporates patient risk preferences into value assessment. The dynamics category petals account for the evolution of real-world treatment value (e.g. option value) and includes drug pricing trends (e.g. future genericization). The beneficiary category accounts for the fact health technologies can benefit others (e.g. caregivers) and also that society may care to whom health benefits accrue (e.g. equity). Finally, GCEA incorporates additional broader sources of value (e.g. community spillovers, productivity losses). This GCEA user guide aims to facilitate both the estimation of each of these value elements and the incorporation of these values into health technology assessment when conducted from a societal perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Shafrin Jason & Kim Jaehong & Cohen Joshua T. & Garrison Louis P. & Goldman Dana A. & Doshi Jalpa A. & Krieger Joshua & Lakdawalla Darius N. & Neumann Peter J. & Phelps Charles E. & Whittington Melani, 2024. "Valuing the Societal Impact of Medicines and Other Health Technologies: A User Guide to Current Best Practices," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 27(1), pages 29-116.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:fhecpo:v:27:y:2024:i:1:p:29-116:n:1002
    DOI: 10.1515/fhep-2024-0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/fhep-2024-0014
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/fhep-2024-0014?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.

    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:bpj:fhecpo:v:27:y:2024:i:1:p:29-116:n:1002. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.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.