Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines: Denmark
Country/Region: Denmark
Published PE Recommendations
Additional Information:
Alban A, Gyldmark M, Pedersen AV, Søgaard J. The Danish Approach to Standards for Economic Evaluation Methodologies. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997 Dec;12(6):627-36.
Abstract in English
Key Features
| Key Features | |
|---|---|
| Type of Guidelines | Published PE Recommendations |
| Title and year of the document | The Danish Approach to Standards for Economic Evaluation Methodologies (Manuscript 1997) |
| Affiliation of authors | Danish Hospital Institute, University of Copenhagen, University of Odense |
| Purpose of the document | Provide guidelines for how health economic analyses should be scoped in relation to application for finansial subsidy |
| Standard reporting format included | Provided as a supplementary note |
| Disclosure | None declared |
| Target audience of funding/ author's interests | Individuals responsible for undertaking economic analysis of pharmaceuticals |
| Perspective | Social perspective |
| Indication | Not specified |
| Target population | It should be clearly defined which patients are expected to be treated with the analysed pharmaceutical |
| Subgroup analysis | Not specified |
| Choice of comparator | Not specified |
| Time horizon | All relevant cost and effects should be identified - no specific time frame formulated |
| Assumptions required | Not specified |
| Preferred analytical technique | Implicit CEA/CUA |
| Costs to be included | All relevant cost - direct, indirect and intangable. Indirect and intangable cost should be reported seprately, and valued on if it is considered relevant. |
| Source of costs | Randomised controlled trials, supplemented by long term consequences (models) |
| Modeling | Not specified |
| Systematic review of evidences | Not specified |
| Preference for effectiveness over efficacy | Not specified |
| Preferred outcome measure | Outcome measures relevant to specific treatement recommended (successfull treatments, time without symptoms or pain, life years, quality adjusted life years. Willingness to pay estimates should not be only outcomess but can be used as a supplement |
| Preferred method to derive utility | TTO or SG from a representative sample of the population |
| Equity issues stated | Not specified |
| Discounting costs | Should be done when there are effect and cost consequences over several years. Decisions on discount rate should be made in each analysis and could be focus for sensitivity analysis |
| Discounting outcomes | As for cost |
| Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range | Should be made to show robustness of analysis conclusion on changes in assumptions, valuation, cost, effect and discounting |
| Sensitivity analysis-methods | None specified |
| Presenting results | Recommended structure: 1: main results and resume; 2: Introduction; 3: Data material; 4: Analyses; 5: Results, conclusion and discussion; 6: References; 7: Appendix |
| Incremental analysis | Not specified |
| Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio) | Not specified |
| Portability of results (Generalizability) | Not specified |
| Financial impact analysis | Finansical consequences on the health budgets as a consequence of using the product should be provided |
| Mandatory or recommended or voluntary | Voluntary |
Acknowledgement: