Comparative effectiveness review within the U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
- PMID: 19639713
Comparative effectiveness review within the U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
Abstract
The U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) was established to perform three core functions: 1) reduce unwarranted variation in practice across the United Kingdom through the development and dissemination of best practice evidence-based standards; 2) encourage fast diffusion and uniform uptake of high-value medical innovations; and 3) ensure the taxpayers' money is invested in the National Health Service so that health benefit is maximized. NICE decisions are made by independent committees of health professionals, academics, and industry and lay representatives. More than 2,000 experts engage with NICE processes throughout the year. NICE committees consider comparative clinical and cost effectiveness, social values (including impact on equity), and U.K. and European Union legislation when making their decisions.
Similar articles
-
Evidence-based decision-making within Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme.Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;60:1-13. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009. PMID: 19639714
-
National Authority for Health: France.Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;58:1-9. Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009. PMID: 19639712
-
Quality, innovation, and value for money: NICE and the British National Health Service.JAMA. 2005 Nov 23;294(20):2618-22. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.20.2618. JAMA. 2005. PMID: 16304076
-
Sensitivity analysis in economic evaluation: an audit of NICE current practice and a review of its use and value in decision-making.Health Technol Assess. 2009 Jun;13(29):iii, ix-xi, 1-61. doi: 10.3310/hta13290. Health Technol Assess. 2009. PMID: 19500484 Review.
-
Has NICE been nice to cancer?Eur J Cancer. 2006 Nov;42(17):2881-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.08.013. Epub 2006 Oct 27. Eur J Cancer. 2006. PMID: 17070032 Review.
Cited by
-
Exploring evidence gaps in clinical trials in thermal burns care: an umbrella review.BMJ Open. 2025 Jun 25;15(6):e094303. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-094303. BMJ Open. 2025. PMID: 40562552 Free PMC article.
-
Societal values in the allocation of healthcare resources: is it all about the health gain?Patient. 2011;4(4):207-25. doi: 10.2165/11588880-000000000-00000. Patient. 2011. PMID: 21815706 Review.
-
Practice variation in induction of labor: A critical document analysis on the contribution of regional protocols.PLoS One. 2024 Oct 1;19(10):e0311032. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311032. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39352904 Free PMC article.
-
A systematic review of cost-sharing strategies used within publicly-funded drug plans in member countries of the organisation for economic co-operation and development.PLoS One. 2014 Mar 11;9(3):e90434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090434. eCollection 2014. PLoS One. 2014. PMID: 24618721 Free PMC article.
-
Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;3:117-86. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S14407. Epub 2011 Aug 30. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011. PMID: 22046102 Free PMC article.