Applying reflective multicriteria decision analysis to understand the value of therapeutic alternatives in the management of gestational and peripartum anaemia in Spain

Casellas, M.; Hidalgo, María Jesús Cancelo; García-Erce, José Antonio; Ubeda, José Luis Baquero; Boatella, Maria Glòria Torras; Díaz, Esther; Encinar, M. Ruano; Bayón, Israel Martín; Picó, Jordi Nicolás; Berral, José Eduardo Arjona; Solano, A.; Merino, Silvia Jiménez; Cerezales, Mónica; Cuervo, Jesús

doi:10.1186/s12884-022-04481-w

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 33 publications

(43 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, cost related criteria were incorporated in EVIDEM frameworks ( Goetghebeur et al, 2012 ). A set of criteria including “direct medical costs,” “direct non-medical costs” and “indirect costs” were used as the “modulators” of core model to measure economic consequences of intervention ( Casellas Caro et al, 2022 ). With the soaring drug costs and limited financial resources, we think cost of the interventions should be considered in decision making, especially in prioritizing drugs for reimbursement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The application of multi-criteria decision analysis in evaluating the value of drug-oriented intervention: a literature review

Su,

Zhi,

et al. 2024

Front. Pharmacol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) has gained increasing attention in supporting drug risk-benefit assessment, pricing and reimbursement, as well as optimization of clinical interventions. The objective of this study was to systematically collect and categorize evaluation criteria and techniques of weighting and scoring of MCDA for drug value assessment.Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted across seven databases to identify articles utilizing the MCDA frameworks for the evaluation of drug value. Evaluation criteria mentioned in the included studies were extracted and assigned to 5 dimensions including clinical, economic, innovative, societal and humanistic value. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed on the identified drug value evaluation criteria, as well as the weighting and scoring techniques employed. The more a criterion or technique were mentioned in articles, the more important we consider it.Results: Out of the 82 articles included, 111 unique criteria were identified to evaluate the value of drug. Among the 56 unique criteria (448 times) used to measure clinical value, the most frequently mentioned were “comparative safety/tolerability” (58 times), “comparative effectiveness/efficacy” (56 times), “comparative patient-perceived health/patient reported outcomes” (37 times), “disease severity” (34 times), and “unmet needs” (25 times). Regarding economic value measurement, out of the 20 unique criteria (124 times), the most frequently utilized criteria were “cost of intervention” (17 times), “comparative other medical costs” (16 times), and “comparative non-medical costs” (18 times). Out of the 10 criteria (18 times) for assessing innovative value, “a novel pharmacological mechanism” was the most frequently mentioned criterion (5 times). Among the 22 criteria (73 times) used to measure societal value, “system capacity and appropriate use of intervention” was the most frequently cited criterion (14 times). Out of the 3 criteria (15 times) utilized to measure humanistic value, “political/historical/cultural context” was the most frequently mentioned criterion (9 times). Furthermore, 11 scoring and 11 weighting techniques were found from various MCDA frameworks. “Swing weighting” and “a direct rating scale” were the most frequently used techniques in included articles.Conclusion: This study comprehensively presented the current evaluation dimensions, criteria, and techniques for scoring and weighting in drug-oriented MCDA articles. By highlighting the frequently cited evaluation criteria and techniques for scoring and weighting, this analysis will provide a foundation to reasonably select appropriate evaluation criteria and technique in constructing the MCDA framework that aligns with research objectives.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%