The Official Journal Of The International Society For Pharmacoeconomics And Outcomes Research
INDEXED IN INDEX MEDICUS/MEDLINE!

General Mission And Policy Statement

Our interest in pharmacoeconomic and outcomes research issues is motivated by two basic propositions we hold as axiomatic. VH is open to all original papers bearing on these two propositions:

(a) the ultimate purpose of health care is to increase the overall health-related well being of the individual and of society as a whole; and
(b) society’s health care resources ought to be allocated in a way that maximizes total health-related well being, given the resources available.

Value in Health focuses on health care worth. Health care cost containment is not a matter of simply purchasing the cheapest drugs or other medical inputs. Increasingly, health care leaders need pharmacoeconomic studies, outcomes research and information that can guide them in health care resource allocation, and in evaluating alternative therapies and interventions. We see our role as encouraging and disseminating pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research and concepts that will be rigorous, methodologically or theoretically solid, ethically sound, and valuable to real-world decision-makers. As the official journal of ISPOR, our vision is to bring researchers and decision-makers together, translating science into practice.

Our goal is to set a high scientific standard, using editorial review and peer review not just to screen manuscripts, but also to foster dialog for researchers in the fields of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research. Sound underlying theory and attention to detail enhances the credibility of pharmacoeconomics and its real world applicability. We feel that some of the theoretical foundations of pharmacoeconomics and health outcomes analyses need to be stronger.

VH invites research manuscripts based on coherent models, empirical studies, and theoretical work having pragmatic or policy-related implications. We don't intend VH to be a predominantly theoretical journal, but are seeking manuscripts that will influence thinking and decision-making in pharmacoeconomics, outcomes analysis, and heath care as a whole. VH invites editorials, policy pieces, letters-to-the-editor, and decision-maker commentary to create a dialog about how researchers can better respond to the needs of those making clinical and financial decisions in health care. We also welcome articles discussing specific examples of research that has had significant impact on health care decision-making.

VH hopes to invest pharmacoeconomics and outcomes analysis with high levels of rigor, and a strong theoretical basis.

Appropriate valuation of pharmaceutical interventions requires multidisciplinary perspective and assessment of economic and outcomes data. Therefore, VH welcomes theoretical and empirical papers not only from economics, but also behavioral psychologists, sociologists, clinicians, ethicists, and others about health effects and health costs that further the foundations of this field and improve the quality and reliability of outcome evaluations of health care interventions.

There remain many challenging empirical and theoretical problems in the concept and measurement of both costs and health-related quality of life (QoL). VH hopes to attract interest in these problems and new, creative efforts to solve them. VH invites research on the development of standard tests for QoL instruments, especially innovative ways of assessing content or construct validity.

METHODOLOGICAL GUIDELINES

Critics point out that pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research lack consensus regarding methodological approaches, underlying theoretical paradigms and presentation of results. One major goal of VH is to serve as a forum where consensus can be built for development of conduct and reporting guidelines. We welcome articles on the philosophical foundations of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research. Although these types of discussions risk being too esoteric for some of the journal’s anticipated audience, if written well, they can be thought provoking and insightful, and we feel they are an essential part of progress in developing methodological consensus.

The value of accepted methodology guidelines, even imperfect ones, far outweighs the confusion and skepticism that exists when no standards exist. Until a more comprehensive set of research guidelines is developed, we encourage authors where possible to include the Reference Case methodology advocated in the Russell et al. report on cost-effectiveness guidelines for the US Public Health Service for the purposes of comparability.

We would like VH to be an outlet for discussion and debate about the principles and substance of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research. One suitable vehicle is the critical literature review. Reviews of methodology, theory, and empirical findings in special areas of health care or policy interest are welcomed. The last should incorporate author assessment of the validity and implications of the research as well as descriptions or summaries of results. Thoughtful, state-of-the-art reviews help bring bodies of research into clear focus.

JOURNAL FORMAT AND STYLE

We also welcome letters to the editor and commentary on the papers published in VH. We will invite editorials from various sources pertaining to the contents of issues. The only restriction placed on editorial content in VH is that it be relevant to the mission and objectives of VH, and it should deal with public or private health care policy issues, insofar as policy is influenced by questions surrounding the value of health care interventions.