Can the EVIDEM Framework Tackle Issues Raised by Evaluating Treatments for Rare Diseases: Analysis of Issues and Policies, and Context-Specific Adaptation

Monika Wagner (), Hanane Khoury, Jacob Willet, Donna Rindress and Mireille Goetghebeur
Additional contact information
Monika Wagner: LASER Analytica
Hanane Khoury: LASER Analytica
Jacob Willet: LASER Analytica
Donna Rindress: LASER Analytica
Mireille Goetghebeur: LASER Analytica

PharmacoEconomics, 2016, vol. 34, issue 3, No 8, 285-301

Abstract: Abstract Background The multiplicity of issues, including uncertainty and ethical dilemmas, and policies involved in appraising interventions for rare diseases suggests that multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) based on a holistic definition of value is uniquely suited for this purpose. The objective of this study was to analyze and further develop a comprehensive MCDA framework (EVIDEM) to address rare disease issues and policies, while maintaining its applicability across disease areas. Methods Specific issues and policies for rare diseases were identified through literature review. Ethical and methodological foundations of the EVIDEM framework v3.0 were systematically analyzed from the perspective of these issues, and policies and modifications of the framework were performed accordingly to ensure their integration. Results Analysis showed that the framework integrates ethical dilemmas and issues inherent to appraising interventions for rare diseases but required further integration of specific aspects. Modification thus included the addition of subcriteria to further differentiate disease severity, disease-specific treatment outcomes, and economic consequences of interventions for rare diseases. Scoring scales were further developed to include negative scales for all comparative criteria. A methodology was established to incorporate context-specific population priorities and policies, such as those for rare diseases, into the quantitative part of the framework. This design allows making more explicit trade-offs between competing ethical positions of fairness (prioritization of those who are worst off), the goal of benefiting as many people as possible, the imperative to help, and wise use of knowledge and resources. It also allows addressing variability in institutional policies regarding prioritization of specific disease areas, in addition to existing uncertainty analysis available from EVIDEM. Conclusion The adapted framework measures value in its widest sense, while being responsive to rare disease issues and policies. It provides an operationalizable platform to integrate values, competing ethical dilemmas, and uncertainty in appraising healthcare interventions.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-015-0340-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:34:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-015-0340-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-015-0340-5

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().