Publications

We are leveraging evidence and influencing the national dialogue about value.

9-16 of 26 Publications

Annals of Medicine 2015

The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations

The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. 

READ MORE

Health Affairs Blog 2015

Moving Beyond Price-Per-Dose in the Pharmaceutical Industry

Many patients today are missing out on the benefits of therapies for financial reasons. The problem here is our current model of pharmaceutical pricing, which threatens to deprive patients of current beneficial therapies and other breakthroughs to come. 

READ MORE

The New England Journal of Medicine 2015

Measuring the Value of Prescription Drugs

Escalating drug prices have alarmed physicians and the American public and led to calls for government price controls. Less visibly, they have also spawned a flurry of private-sector initiatives designed to help physicians, payers, and patients understand the value of new therapies and thus make better choices about their use. Programs recently introduced or advanced by nonprofit organizations, including leading medical professional societies, represent an important innovation in the United States, but they have also revealed numerous analytic and implementation challenges.

READ MORE

Health Affairs Blog 2015

It's time for Value-Based Payment in Oncology

Value-based health care has risen to the top of the health policy agenda, as public and private payers search for ways to improve outcomes. The value principle—reimbursing hospitals, physicians, and other health care providers for quality or quality improvement that also help lower costs—aligns incentives between payers and providers. It’s time to apply this principle in oncology.

READ MORE

The Economist's Voice 2015

Are Biopharmaceutical Budget Caps Good Public Policy?

Medical innovation has generated significant gains in health over the past decades, but these advances have been accompanied by rapid growth in healthcare spending. Faced with a growing number of high-cost but high impact innovations, some have argued to constrain prices for new therapies – especially through global caps on pharmaceutical spending and limits on prices for individual drugs. We show that applying this threshold to past innovations would have limited access to many highly valuable drugs such as statins and anti-retrovirals. We also argue that budget caps violate several important principles of health policy. 

READ MORE

Health Services Research 2014

Reforming Medicare’s Dialysis Payment Policies: Implications for Patients with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism

Expanding services covered by a “bundled payment” can also expand variation in the costs of treating patients under the bundle. In this article, Charu Gupta et al.explore this topic further using the Medicare dialysis program as an example.  

READ MORE

Value in Health 2014

Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report

Despite the great realized or potential value of network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial evidence to inform health care decision making, many decision makers might not be familiar with these techniques. The Task Force developed a consensus-based 26-item questionnaire to help decision makers assess the relevance and the credibility of indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis to help inform health care decision making. 

READ MORE

BMC Medicine 2013

Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers

In the last decade, network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has been introduced as an extension of pairwise meta-analysis. The advantage of network meta-analysis over standard pairwise meta-analysis is that it facilitates indirect comparisons of multiple interventions that have not been studied in a head-to-head fashion. 

READ MORE