Methods for Economic Evaluation of Marketed Medicines Ⅱ: Conducting Primary Economic Evaluation_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

SUN Xin ¹ , Ewa Orlewska ² , LI Youping ¹ , CHENG Gang ³ , YANG Huan ⁴

1. Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China; 2. Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, Warsaw, Poland; 3. Center for Drug Re-evaluation, State Food and Drug Administration, Beijing 100061, China; 4. Center for Drug Evaluation, State Food and Drug Administration, Beijing 100061, China;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

Economic evaluation; Marketed medicines; Methods

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Primary economic evaluations are needed in the case that the systematic review of existing economic evidence is not capable of informing economic profiles of marketed medicines. Following the first section of this programs, we presented the principles of designing a study, measuring costs and outcomes, and performing sensitivity analyses. Generally, four designs of economic evaluations are available to perform economic evaluations, each of which has specific strengths and weaknesses. Valuation of outcomes and costs may differ in methods, mainly based on the requirements and applicability of study. The possible factors leading to variation of results should be analyzed using analytic methods with different techniques.

Citation： SUN Xin,Ewa Orlewska,LI Youping,CHENG Gang,YANG Huan. Methods for Economic Evaluation of Marketed Medicines Ⅱ: Conducting Primary Economic Evaluation. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2006, 06(3): 218-223. doi: Copy

1.	SUN X, Orlewska E, LI YP, et al. An introduction to methods for economic evaluation of marketed medicines I: setting up an economic framework and reviewing existing evidence. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2005; 5(12): 944-949.
2.	Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, et al. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2003; 3: 28.
3.	MacPherson H. Pragmatic clinical trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2004; 12: 136-140.
4.	Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.
5.	Sonnenberg FA. Decision analysis in disease management. Disease Management and Clinica Outcomes, 1997; 1(1): 20-34.
6.	Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, van Hout BA, et al. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Econ, 1997; 6(3): 217-227.
7.	Green C, Brazier J, Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics, 2000; 17(2): 151-165.
8.	Polsky D, Willke RJ, Scott K, et al. A comparison of scoring weights for the EuroQol derived from patients and the general public. Health Econ, 2001; 10(1): 27-37.
9.	Neymark N, Kiebert W, Torfs K, et al. Methodological and statistical issues of quality of life (QoL) and economic evaluation in cancer clinical trials: report of a workshop. Eur J Cancer, 1998; 34(9): 1317-1333.
10.	Bayoumi AM. The Measurement of Contingent Valuation for Health Economics. Pharmacoeconomics, 2004; 22(11): 691-700.
11.	Levels of Evidence-March 2002. Available from: http://www.eboncall.org/content/levels.html.
12.	Brouwer WB, Koopmanschap MA. The friction-cost method: replacement for nothing and leisure for free? Pharmacoeconomics, 2005; 23(2): 105-111.
13.	Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. Standardisation of costs: the Dutch Manual for Costing in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics, 2002; 20(7): 443-454.
14.	Nuijten MJ. Measuring sensitivity in pharmacoeconomic studies. Refining point sensitivity and range sensitivity by incorporating probability distributions. Pharmacoeconomics, 1999; 16(1): 33-41.
15.	Tambour M, Zethraeus N. Bootstrap confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: some simulation results. Health Econ, 1998; 7(2): 143-147.
16.	Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics, 2000; 17(5): 479-500.
17.	Briggs AH, Gray AM. Handling uncertainty when performing economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. Health Technol Assess, 1999; 3(2): 1-134.

1. SUN X, Orlewska E, LI YP, et al. An introduction to methods for economic evaluation of marketed medicines I: setting up an economic framework and reviewing existing evidence. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2005; 5(12): 944-949.
2. Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, et al. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2003; 3: 28.
3. MacPherson H. Pragmatic clinical trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 2004; 12: 136-140.
4. Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.
5. Sonnenberg FA. Decision analysis in disease management. Disease Management and Clinica Outcomes, 1997; 1(1): 20-34.
6. Buxton MJ, Drummond MF, van Hout BA, et al. Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. Health Econ, 1997; 6(3): 217-227.
7. Green C, Brazier J, Deverill M. Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics, 2000; 17(2): 151-165.
8. Polsky D, Willke RJ, Scott K, et al. A comparison of scoring weights for the EuroQol derived from patients and the general public. Health Econ, 2001; 10(1): 27-37.
9. Neymark N, Kiebert W, Torfs K, et al. Methodological and statistical issues of quality of life (QoL) and economic evaluation in cancer clinical trials: report of a workshop. Eur J Cancer, 1998; 34(9): 1317-1333.
10. Bayoumi AM. The Measurement of Contingent Valuation for Health Economics. Pharmacoeconomics, 2004; 22(11): 691-700.
11. Levels of Evidence-March 2002. Available from: http://www.eboncall.org/content/levels.html.
12. Brouwer WB, Koopmanschap MA. The friction-cost method: replacement for nothing and leisure for free? Pharmacoeconomics, 2005; 23(2): 105-111.
13. Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. Standardisation of costs: the Dutch Manual for Costing in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics, 2002; 20(7): 443-454.
14. Nuijten MJ. Measuring sensitivity in pharmacoeconomic studies. Refining point sensitivity and range sensitivity by incorporating probability distributions. Pharmacoeconomics, 1999; 16(1): 33-41.
15. Tambour M, Zethraeus N. Bootstrap confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: some simulation results. Health Econ, 1998; 7(2): 143-147.
16. Briggs AH. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics, 2000; 17(5): 479-500.
17. Briggs AH, Gray AM. Handling uncertainty when performing economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. Health Technol Assess, 1999; 3(2): 1-134.

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Methods for Economic Evaluation of Marketed Medicines Ⅱ: Conducting Primary Economic Evaluation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Format

Content