nach oben

PharmacoEconomics

Erschienen in:

01.09.2008 | Editorial

NICE Methodology for Technology Appraisals

Cutting Edge or Tried and Trusted?

verfasst von: Dr Louise Longworth, Carole Longson

Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics | Ausgabe 9/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Excerpt

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisals Programme produces guidance on the use of technologies in the UK NHS, with specific reference to clinical and cost effectiveness. As with all NICE guidance, the Institute’s methods and processes are subject to regular review. The 2004 NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal[1] was reviewed during 2007, and an updated 2008 Methods Guide has recently been published.[2] …

National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (ref N01505). London: NICE 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http:/Avww.nice.org.uk/about nice/howwework/devnicetech/technologyappraisalprocessguides/guide_to_the_methods_of_technology_appraisal_referen ce_n0515.jsp [Accessed 2008 Aug 5]

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (ref N1618). London: NICE, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B5 2/A7/T AMethodsGuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf [Accessed 2008 Aug 5]

Brazier J. Valuing health states for use in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 769–779PubMedCrossRef

Claxton K. Exploring uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 781–798PubMedCrossRef

McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer AJ. The NICE cost-effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 733–744PubMedCrossRef

Miners A. Estimating ‘costs’ for cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 745–751PubMedCrossRef

Sculpher M. Subgroups and heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 799–806PubMedCrossRef

Sutton A, Ades AE, Cooper N, et al, on behalf of the NICE Decision Support Unit. Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (9): 753–767PubMedCrossRef

Martin S, Rice N, Smith PC. Further evidence on the link between health care spending and health outcomes in England [Centre for Health Economics Research Paper 32]. York: University of York, 2007

10.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion for the treatment of diabetes. NICE technology appraisal guidance 151. London: NICE 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA151 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

11.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Cetuximab for the treatment of head and neck cancer. NICE technology appraisal guidance 145. London: NICE, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TAl 45 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

12.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Infliximab for the treatment of psoriasis. NICE technology appraisal guidance 134. London: NICE, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA134 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

13.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Omalizumab for severe persistent allergic asthma. NICE technology appraisal guidance 133. London: NICE, 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TAl 33 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

14.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Natalizumab for the treatment of adults with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. NICE technology appraisal guidance 127. London: NICE, 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA127 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

15.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Carmustine implants and temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed high grade glioma. NICE technology appraisal guidance 121. London: NICE, 2008 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA121 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

16.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Cardiac resynchronisation therapy for the treatment of heart failure. NICE technology appraisal guidance 120. London: NICE 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA120 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

17.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Etanercept and efalizumab for the treatment of adults with psoriasis. NICE technology appraisal guidance 103. London: NICE, 2006 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA103 [Accessed 2008 Aug 6]

Titel: NICE Methodology for Technology Appraisals
Cutting Edge or Tried and Trusted?
verfasst von: Dr Louise Longworth
Carole Longson
Publikationsdatum: 01.09.2008
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics / Ausgabe 9/2008
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200826090-00003

Springer Medizin

Excerpt

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2008

Exploring Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

The NICE Cost-Effectiveness Threshold

Estimating ‘Costs’ for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Valuing Health States for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

NICE’s 2008 Methods Guide

Use of Indirect and Mixed Treatment Comparisons for Technology Assessment