EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Does Methodological Guidance Produce Consistency? A Review of Methodological Consistency in Breast Cancer Utility Value Measurement in NICE Single Technology Appraisals

Micah Rose (), Stephen Rice and Dawn Craig
Additional contact information
Micah Rose: University of Southampton, The University of Southampton Science Park
Stephen Rice: Newcastle University
Dawn Craig: Newcastle University

PharmacoEconomics - Open, 2018, vol. 2, issue 2, 97-107

Abstract: Abstract Since 2004, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) methodological guidance for technology appraisals has emphasised a strong preference for using the validated EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) quality-of-life instrument, measuring patient health status from patients or carers, and using the general public’s preference-based valuation of different health states when assessing health benefits in economic evaluations. The aim of this study was to review all NICE single technology appraisals (STAs) for breast cancer treatments to explore consistency in the use of utility scores in light of NICE methodological guidance. A review of all published breast cancer STAs was undertaken using all publicly available STA documents for each included assessment. Utility scores were assessed for consistency with NICE-preferred methods and original data sources. Furthermore, academic assessment group work undertaken during the STA process was examined to evaluate the emphasis of NICE-preferred quality-of-life measurement methods. Twelve breast cancer STAs were identified, and many STAs used evidence that did not follow NICE’s preferred utility score measurement methods. Recent STA submissions show companies using EQ-5D and mapping. Academic assessment groups rarely emphasized NICE-preferred methods, and queries about preferred methods were rare. While there appears to be a trend in recent STA submissions towards following NICE methodological guidance, historically STA guidance in breast cancer has generally not used NICE’s preferred methods. Future STAs in breast cancer and reviews of older guidance should ensure that utility measurement methods are consistent with the NICE reference case to help produce consistent, equitable decision making.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-017-0040-5 Abstract (text/html)

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:pharmo:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-017-0040-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/adis/journal/41669

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics - Open is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics - Open from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla ().

 
Page updated 2019-11-06
Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-017-0040-5