Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPATEL, AKen_US
dc.contributor.authorTordrup, Den_US
dc.contributor.authorChouaid, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorCuijpers, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorSach, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorMcDaid, Den_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-02-20T10:14:12Z
dc.date.available2016-12-21en_US
dc.date.issued2017-10-30en_US
dc.date.submitted2017-02-07T11:13:04.458Z
dc.identifier.issn0266-4623en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/19441
dc.description.abstractThe importance of economic evaluation in decision-making is growing with increasing budgetary pressures on health systems. Diverse economic evidence is available for a range of interventions across national contexts within Europe, but little attention has been given to identifying evidence gaps that, if filled, could contribute to more efficient allocation of resources. One objective of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation project is to determine the most important methodological evidence gaps for the 10 highest burden conditions in the EU, and to suggest ways of filling these gaps. Methods The highest burden conditions in the EU by Disability Adjusted Life Years were determined using the Global Burden of Disease study. Clinical interventions were identified for each condition based on published guidelines, and economic evaluations indexed in MEDLINE were mapped to each intervention. A panel of public health and health economics experts discussed the evidence during a workshop and identified evidence gaps. Results The literature analysis contributed to identifying cross-cutting methodological and technical issues, which were considered by the expert panel in order to derive methodological research priorities. Conclusions The panel suggests a research agenda for health economics which incorporates the use of real-world evidence in the assessment of new and existing interventions; increased understanding of cost-effectiveness according to patient characteristics beyond the “-omics” approach to inform both investment and disinvestment decisions; methods for assessment of complex interventions; improved cross-talk between economic evaluations from health and other sectors; early health technology assessment; and standardized, transferable approaches to economic modelling.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipResearch Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation (RAHEE) project is funded by the European Commission Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, contribution agreement 2011 53 02.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Careen_US
dc.rightsThis is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care following peer review.
dc.subjectEconomic evaluationen_US
dc.subjectcost-effectiveness analysisen_US
dc.subjectmethodsen_US
dc.subjectexpert opinionen_US
dc.subjectresearch agendaen_US
dc.titlePriorities for Health Economic Methodological Researchen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© 2017 Cambridge University Press
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0266462317000666en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-12-21en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record