Ht1 Comparative-Effectiveness Versus Cost-Effectiveness: A Comparison of the French and Scottish Approaches to Single Technology Assessment (Sta)

Bending, MW; Hutton, John; McGrath, Clare

doi:10.1016/s1098-3015(10)71993-8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, compared to NICE, the TLV was more willing to consider need over cost, as intimated earlier, approving drugs beyond the threshold, up to £75,000, when there is high clinical need in certain sub-populations. Other research (Bending, Hutton and McGrath, 2010;Patel et al, 2010) on cancer drugs substantiates the influence of evidence requirements, where agencies (i.e. NICE) focused on cost-effectiveness less frequently gave positive recommendations (about 50%) compared with those only requiring evidence of clinical effectiveness (i.e.…”

Section: Applying Evidence To Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflections on the evolution of health technology assessment in Europe

Sorenson

Chalkidou

2012

HEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health technology assessment (HTA) has assumed an increasing role in health systems in recent years, with many countries establishing agencies or programmes to evaluate health technology and other interventions to inform policy decisions and clinical practice. This paper reflects upon its development and evolution in Europe over the last decade, with a focus on England, France, Germany and Sweden. In particular, we explore how HTA has evolved over time as well as its impact on policy and practice. While countries share many of the same objectives, there are differences in the way HTA agencies and programmes are organised, operate, and influence decision making. Despite these differences, all systems are faced with opportunities and challenges related to stakeholder involvement and acceptance, the suitability and transparency of assessment requirements and methods, balancing evidence and values in decision making, and demonstrating impact.

show abstract

Section: Applying Evidence To Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%