IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v31y2013i2p137-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Does NICE Recommend the Use of Health Technologies Within a Programme of Evidence Development?

Author

Listed:
  • Louise Longworth
  • JiHee Youn
  • Laura Bojke
  • Stephen Palmer
  • Susan Griffin
  • Eldon Spackman
  • Karl Claxton

Abstract

NICE has used its ability to recommend technologies within research programmes, although predominantly within the multiple technology appraisal process. OIR recommendations have been most frequently issued for technologies considered cost ineffective and the most frequently cited consideration is uncertainty related to relative effectiveness. Key considerations cited for most AWR recommendations and some OIR recommendations included a need for further evidence on long-term outcomes and adverse effects of treatment. Copyright The Author(s) 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Louise Longworth & JiHee Youn & Laura Bojke & Stephen Palmer & Susan Griffin & Eldon Spackman & Karl Claxton, 2013. "When Does NICE Recommend the Use of Health Technologies Within a Programme of Evidence Development?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 137-149, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:31:y:2013:i:2:p:137-149
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-012-0013-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40273-012-0013-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-012-0013-6?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. Karl Claxton & Stephen Palmer & Louise Longworth & Laura Bojke & Susan Griffin & Claire McKenna & Marta Soares & Eldon Spackman & Jihee Youn, 2011. "Uncertainty, evidence and irrecoverable costs: Informing approval, pricing and research decisions for health technologies," Working Papers 069cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bognar, Katalin & Romley, John A. & Bae, Jay P. & Murray, James & Chou, Jacquelyn W. & Lakdawalla, Darius N., 2017. "The role of imperfect surrogate endpoint information in drug approval and reimbursement decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Martelli, Nicolas & van den Brink, Hélène, 2014. "Special funding schemes for innovative medical devices in French hospitals: The pros and cons of two different approaches," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 1-5.

    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. Laura Bojke & Andrea Manca & Miqdad Asaria & Ronan Mahon & Shijie Ren & Stephen Palmer, 2017. "How to Appropriately Extrapolate Costs and Utilities in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 767-776, August.
    2. Christopher McCabe & Richard Edlin & Peter Hall, 2013. "Navigating Time and Uncertainty in Health Technology Appraisal: Would a Map Help?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(9), pages 731-737, September.

    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:spr:pharme:v:31:y:2013:i:2:p:137-149. 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.