Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 1999 May;15(5):423-34.
doi: 10.2165/00019053-199915050-00001.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in the real world. Effectiveness versus efficacy studies

Affiliations
Review

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation in the real world. Effectiveness versus efficacy studies

D A Revicki et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 May.

Abstract

Pharmacoeconomic data may be obtained within the context of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and from effectiveness studies in the 'real world'. The differences between the 2 types of study design have implications for the types of data that can be obtained and the interpretation of the resulting findings. Because RCTs are designed to assess the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals, and because the study design of RCTs emphasises internal validity over generalisability, the pharmacoeconomic data collected from them are limited. The data may not be applicable to the more heterogeneous patients encountered in actual clinical practice, and cost estimates may be inaccurate because of protocol requirements. Effectiveness studies, in which treatments are studied under real-world conditions, remedy some of these limitations. Generalisability to actual users is generally enhanced in effectiveness designs, but data may be biased in other ways. This brief review compares the 2 study designs as they relate to pharmacoeconomic evaluations in terms of the research questions they address, design differences and their implications for study bias, data collection and data analysis and the generalisability of their results.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Am J Manag Care. 1997 Nov;3(11):1660-6 - PubMed
    1. New Dir Ment Health Serv. 1996 Fall;(71):3-17 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 Mar;48(3):363-73 - PubMed
    1. Arch Fam Med. 1999 Jul-Aug;8(4):319-25 - PubMed
    1. Psychopharmacol Bull. 1995;31(1):57-65 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources