Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/4671
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTrueman, P-
dc.contributor.authorGrainger, DL-
dc.contributor.authorDowns, KE-
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-07T14:09:45Z-
dc.date.available2011-01-07T14:09:45Z-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 26(1): 79–85, Jan 2010en_US
dc.identifier.issn1471-6348-
dc.identifier.urihttp://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7029708en
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/4671-
dc.descriptionCopyright © Cambridge University Press, 2010en_US
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe the current issues surrounding Coverage with Evidence Development (CED). CED is characterized by restricted coverage for a new technology in parallel with targeted research when the stated goal of the research or data collection is to provide definitive evidence for the clinical or cost-effectiveness impact of the new technology. METHODS: Presented here is information summarized and interpreted from presentations and discussions at the 2008 Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) meeting and additional information from the medical literature. This study describes the differences between CED and other conditional coverage agreements, provides a brief history of CED, describes real-world examples of CED, describes the areas of consensus between the stakeholders, discusses the areas for future negotiation between stakeholders, and proposes criteria to assist stakeholders in determining when CED could be appropriate. RESULTS: Payers could interpret the evidence obtained from a CED program either positively or negatively, and a range of possible changes to the reimbursement status of the new technology may result. Striking an appropriate balance between the demands for prompt access to new technology and acknowledging that some degree of uncertainty will always exist is a critical challenge to the uptake of this innovative form of conditional coverage. CONCLUSIONS: When used selectively for innovative procedures, pharmaceuticals, or devices in the appropriate disease areas, CED may provide patients access to promising medicines or technologies while data to minimize uncertainty are collected.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe development of the manuscript was funded by Medicines Australiaen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofThe Health Economics Research Group-
dc.subjectCoverage with evidence developmenten_US
dc.subjectInsurance coverageen_US
dc.subjectEconomicsen_US
dc.subjectEvidence-based healthcareen_US
dc.titleCoverage with evidence development: applications and issuesen_US
dc.typeResearch Paperen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462309990882-
Appears in Collections:Health Economics Research Group (HERG)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Fulltext.pdf75.37 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.