ICER Value Framework 2020 Update: Recommendations on the Aggregation of Benefits and Contextual Considerations

被引:12
作者
Angelis, Aris [1 ]
Kanavos, Panos [1 ]
Phillips, Lawrence D. [2 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Econ, Dept Hlth Policy, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, England
[2] London Sch Econ, Dept Management, London, England
关键词
decision conferencing; healthcare interventions; health technology assessement (HTA); Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER); multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA); quantitative decision analysis; value framework; MULTICRITERIA DECISION-ANALYSIS; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY-ASSESSMENT; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; RESOURCE-ALLOCATION; ECONOMICS APPROACH; CARE; CRITERIA; RISK; MCDA; PRIORITIZATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2020.04.1828
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) in the United States recently published a 2020 update to its value assessment framework. We are commenting on the method by which the benefits of health interventions are integrated, relating to contextual considerations and other factors relevant to an intervention's value. We start by discussing the theoretical foundations of decision analysis and its extension to multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Then we provide a detailed, evidence-based response to some of the claims made by ICER with regard to the use of MCDA methods and stakeholder engagement. Finally, we provide a number of recommendations on the use of quantitative decision analysis and decision conferencing that could be of relevance to the ICER methodology. Overall, we agree that some of the proposed changes by ICER are moving in the right direction toward improving transparency in the value assessment process, but these changes are probably inadequate. We advocate that more serious attention should be paid to the use of quantitative decision analysis together with decision conferencing for the construction of value preferences via group processes for the integration of an intervention's various benefit components.
引用
收藏
页码:1040 / 1048
页数:9
相关论文
共 78 条
[1]   Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for HTA across four EU Member States: Piloting the Advance Value Framework [J].
Angelis, A. ;
Linch, M. ;
Montibeller, G. ;
Molina-Lopez, T. ;
Zawada, A. ;
Orzel, K. ;
Arickx, F. ;
Espin, J. ;
Kanavos, P. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2020, 246
[2]  
Angelis A, MED DECISION MAKING
[3]  
Angelis A., 2018, EVALUATING BENEFITS
[4]  
Angelis A, 2020, BR J CLIN PHARM, P1
[5]   Using health technology assessment to assess the value of new medicines: results of a systematic review and expert consultation across eight European countries [J].
Angelis, Aris ;
Lange, Ansgar ;
Kanavos, Panos .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2018, 19 (01) :123-152
[6]   Multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment: a simulation exercise on metastatic colorectal cancer with multiple stakeholders in the English setting [J].
Angelis, Aris ;
Montibeller, Gilberto ;
Hochhauser, Daniel ;
Kanavos, Panos .
BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, 2017, 17
[7]   Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework [J].
Angelis, Aris ;
Kanavos, Panos .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2017, 188 :137-156
[8]   Value-Based Assessment of New Medical Technologies: Towards a Robust Methodological Framework for the Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis in the Context of Health Technology Assessment [J].
Angelis, Aris ;
Kanavos, Panos .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2016, 34 (05) :435-446
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Galileos' Reading
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013