How can multi criteria decision analysis support value assessment of pharmaceuticals? - Findings from a systematic literature review

Kolasa, Katarzyna; Zah, V.; Kowalczyk, Marta

doi:10.1080/14737167.2018.1467759

Cited by 13 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Cited limitations included the technical complexity of the approaches and resource demand (Kapiriri and Razavi, 2017). The lack of and need for publishing the real-word experience of using MCDAs has been highlighted by other researchers (Kapiriri and Razavi, 2017;Kolasa et al, 2018) and it is in line with our concerns as well. Such publicly available information can be crucial in supporting the implementation of MCDA in more countries and should be highly encouraged to publish.…”

Section: Potential Limitations Of Mcda Usementioning

confidence: 54%

Potential Criteria for Frameworks to Support the Evaluation of Innovative Medicines in Upper Middle-Income Countries—A Systematic Literature Review on Value Frameworks and Multi-Criteria Decision Analyses

Jakab¹,

Németh²,

Elezbawy³

et al. 2020

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), a formal decision support framework, has been growing in popularity recently in the field of health care. MCDA can support pricing and reimbursement decisions on the macro level, which is of great importance especially in countries with more limited resources. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to facilitate the development of future MCDA frameworks, by proposing a set of criteria focusing on the purchasing decisions of single-source innovative pharmaceuticals in upper middle-income countries. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted on the decision criteria included in value frameworks (VFs) or MCDA tools. Scopus, Medline, databases of universities, websites of Health Technology Assessment Agencies, and other relevant organizations were included in the search. Double title-abstract screening and double full-text review were conducted, and all extracted data were double-checked. A team of researchers performed the merging and selection process of the extracted criteria. Results: A total of 1,878 articles entered the title and abstract screening. From these, 341 were eligible to the full-text review, and 36 were included in the final data extraction phase. From these articles 394 criteria were extracted in total. After deduplication and clustering, 26 different criteria were identified. After the merging and selection process, a set of 16 general criteria was proposed. Conclusion: Based on the results of the systematic literature review, a pool of 16 criteria was selected. This can serve as a starting point for constructing MCDA frameworks in upper middle-income countries after careful adaptation to the local context.

show abstract

Section: Potential Limitations Of Mcda Usementioning

confidence: 54%

Potential Criteria for Frameworks to Support the Evaluation of Innovative Medicines in Upper Middle-Income Countries—A Systematic Literature Review on Value Frameworks and Multi-Criteria Decision Analyses

Jakab¹,

Németh²,

Elezbawy³

et al. 2020

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As decisions in healthcare often impact a wide range of stakeholders, the criteria may also be chosen to accommodate different stakeholder perspectives [26]. MCDA is being used widely across health-care systems to inform decision-making in healthcare, including benefit-risk assessment of medicines, formulary listings, purchasing, or reimbursement decisions [25,[27][28][29]. MCDA has specifically been suggested as an evidence-based health technology assessment (HTA) tool for evaluating off-patent pharmaceuticals in developing countries [30].…”

Section: A Format To Facilitate Policy Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value-Based Evaluation of Chinese Provincial Health Insurance Policy Schemes

Hu¹,

Holtorf²,

Wijaya³

et al. 2020

Evaluation of Health Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 2011, an international group of health policy experts has been working on a value-framework to be used for pharmaceutical policy decisions based on multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). This tool can be easily adapted to a local decision-making context through a facilitated workshop format. Several workshops have been conducted in emerging markets to test the acceptance and feasibility of using MCDA in local decision-making. In China, national policy goals for expanding health-care coverage pressure the provincial governments to implement more comprehensive coverage schemes. This chapter demonstrates the adaptation of a global value-framework to the local policy environment. In September 2018, nine leaders from provincial health insurance bureaus responsible for the urban employee basic medical insurance (UEBMI) participated in a 1-day workshop to build a consensus on the most important objectives for the health-care reform and to translate these into measurable criteria. The participants ranked the criteria by importance and MCDA methodology was used for weighing the importance of each criterion in the final decision. The model driving this process will be presented and discussed by comparing two policy options for health-care reform.

show abstract

“…For tendering authorities to make meaningful and evidence-based decisions that take account of VAS, they will likely require some form of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). MCDA is a decision-making process widely used in Health Technology Assessments (HTA), where the criteria are defined, ranked in terms of relevance and importance, and evaluated consistently [43][44][45]. As such, VAS are considered separately, or incorporated among other categories in MCDA.…”

Section: Application Of Multi-criteria Decision Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Tendering and biosimilars: what role for value-added services?

Simoens

Cheung

2019

Journal of Market Access & Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Access to biologic medicines (including biosimilars) across Europe is largely governed by a process of tendering conducted by health authorities. Over-reliance on treatment costs in awarding tenders has the potential to hinder competition and undermine the long-term sustainability of biosimilars. Objective: To assess the extent and impact of consideration of 'value-added services' (VAS) in tendering for biosimilars, we conducted a narrative review of published literature. Results: Findings from survey-based publications indicated that tendering practices for biosimilars are widely used, with cost being the main determinant of success and little detail being available on other criteria where these apply. Criteria (of therapeutic and technical interest) beyond price were included in one tendering specification for infliximab (originator and biosimilars), while a separate tender for the same product included VAS in the form of therapeutic drug monitoring, measurement of antibodies and calprotectin. Conclusions: Published evidence concerning inclusion of VAS in tendering for biosimilars is lacking. Development and implementation of standardized criteria and methods of assessment for tenders may avoid manufacturers facing segmented markets, encourage competition and the longer-term sustainability of biosimilars, and realize the healthcare system and patient benefits these treatments can bring. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

How can multi criteria decision analysis support value assessment of pharmaceuticals? - Findings from a systematic literature review

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Potential Criteria for Frameworks to Support the Evaluation of Innovative Medicines in Upper Middle-Income Countries—A Systematic Literature Review on Value Frameworks and Multi-Criteria Decision Analyses

Potential Criteria for Frameworks to Support the Evaluation of Innovative Medicines in Upper Middle-Income Countries—A Systematic Literature Review on Value Frameworks and Multi-Criteria Decision Analyses

Value-Based Evaluation of Chinese Provincial Health Insurance Policy Schemes

Tendering and biosimilars: what role for value-added services?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About