Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions: Emerging Good Practices

Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions Emerging Good Practices:

  • Report 1: Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions Emerging Good Practices – An Introduction
  • Report 2: Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions Emerging Good Practices – Analytical Methods

Thank you to those who reviewed these reports. Your insight and expertise contribute to the high quality, multi-perspective and consensus nature of ISPOR Good Practices for Outcomes Research Task Force Reports.

Co-Chairs:
Claire Rothery, PhD
Senior Research Fellow, University of York
York, England, UK
Elisabeth Fenwick, PhD
Principal, Health Economics, ICON plc
Oxford, England, UK
Leadership Group:

Anirban Basu, PhD, Professor, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, DC, USA
Rachael Fleurence, PhD, Executive Director, National Evaluation System for health Technology Coordinating Center (NESTcc), Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC), Arlington, VA, USA
Salah Ghabri, PhD, Health Economist/Project Coordinator, French National Authority for Health (HAS), Saint Denis La Plaine, France
Saskia Knies, PhD, Advisor, Pharmacoeconomics at National Health Care Institute - ‎National Health Care Institute (Zorginstituut Nederland) Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Erik Koffijberg, PhD, Associate Professor of Health Economics, University of Twente, Enchede, The Netherlands
James F. Murray, PhD, Research Fellow, Global Health Outcomes and Real World Evidence, Center of Expertise, Eli Lilly and Company, Carmel, IN, USA
Gillian D. Sanders Schmidler, PhD, Associate Professor of Medicine and of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Lotte Steuten, PhD, Associate Professor & Director, Health Economics, Fred Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes, Seattle, Washington, USA
Mark Strong, PhD, MPH, MSc, Section Director, Public Health, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK

Objective:

The overall objective of this task force is to develop good practice guidance for using methods of value of information analysis to inform both technology reimbursement decisions and research prioritization decisions.

Specifically, the task force will:

  1. Introduce and describe what VOI analysis is and why it should be used for decision making;
  2. Introduce the types of healthcare decisions that are supported by VOI analysis;
  3. Define the concepts and terminology used in VOI analysis and how each should be used to address different elements of the research decision problem: EVPI, EVPPI, EVSI and ENBS;
  4. Describe how to use and interpret the results of VOI analysis to inform research decisions;
  5. Show how VOI should be used to inform reimbursement decisions and conditional coverage decisions with research (e.g. coverage with evidence development and similar frameworks);
  6. Show how VOI should be used to inform research prioritization and commissioning decisions by providing a metric of value that can be used to rank research priorities.
Background:

Decisions about the reimbursement of healthcare technologies are increasingly being made when the evidence base to support their use is least mature.  This is partly linked to changes in the regulatory landscape where regulators and payers have produced new approaches in an effort to provide patients with timely access to new medicines.  For example, the European Medicine’s Agency recently introduced the “Adaptive Pathways” approach, aimed at providing patients with early access to new interventions.  The approach involves acquiring and (re)assessing evidence at different stages in the product’s life cycle (Baird et al., 2014). 

The pressure for health systems to become “early adopters” of these promising new technologies has caused increased tension between innovation, access, and efficiency.  Innovation and early access will not necessarily lead to an efficient use of resources.  Use of a premature evidence base also carries substantial risk and uncertainty for patient outcomes.  A decision made too early could result in a waste of resources on cost-ineffective or even harmful practices which, once diffused, are difficult to eliminate (Chalkidou et al., 2008).  Background continued...

Rationale

Bibliography

Activities:

W7: Value of Information (VOI) Analysis for Research Decisions: Emerging Good Practice Recommendations from the ISPOR VOI Task Force
November 2017 – 20th Annual European Congress, Workshop Presentation, Glasgow, Scotland, UK

Report from the ISPOR Value of Information Task Force
May 2017 – 22nd Annual International Meeting, Workshop Presentation, Boston, MA, USA

Strengthening the Role of Value of Information Analysis in Health Technology Assessment: Known Challenges and Proposed Solutions
November 2016 – 19th Annual European Congress, Workshop Presentation, Vienna, Austria

Timeline:

Activity:

Deadline:

ISPOR Washington DC organizational meeting of attending members

May 25, 2016

Proposal reviewed by the ISPOR Health Science Policy Council

June 29, 2016

Proposal recommended by the Council

July 11, 2016

Proposal approved by the ISPOR Board of Directors

July 25, 2016

Teleconferences & detailed outline development

August – September 2016

Prepare material for ISPOR Vienna

October 2016

Meeting of Task Force members during ISPOR Vienna

31 October 2016

Presentation during ISPOR Vienna

1 November 2016

Draft sections of each report and hold teleconference call(s) to agree on content

November 2016 – May 2017

Prepare material for ISPOR Boston

April 2017

Meeting of Task Force members during ISPOR Boston

May 23, 2017

Workshop presentation at ISPOR Boston

May 23, 2017

Finalize both reports for review Revisions to address comments

June 2017

Reports out for 1st round review

July 3 – 31, 2017

Revisions based on comments received August – September 2017

Review round 2

September 8 – October 6, 2017

Revisions based on membership review

October 2017 ongoing

Task Force meeting at ISPOR Glasgow

November 6 or 7, 2017

Final presentation at ISPOR Glasgow

November 6 or 7, 2017

Finalize reports

November – December 2017

Submission of Report 1

Early December for February 2018 publication

Submission of Report 2

Early January for March 2018 publication

If you are interested in joining this ISPOR Task Force, please complete the Special Interest Group and Task Forces Form.

Task Forces Index