A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Accounting for Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review. | LitMetric

Accounting for Capacity Constraints in Economic Evaluations of Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review.

Pharmacoeconomics

Manchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.

Published: August 2019


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background And Objective: Precision (stratified or personalised) medicine is underpinned by the premise that it is feasible to identify known heterogeneity using a specific test or algorithm in patient populations and to use this information to guide patient care to improve health and well-being. This study aimed to understand if, and how, previous economic evaluations of precision medicine had taken account of the impact of capacity constraints.

Methods: A meta-review was conducted of published systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine (test-treat interventions) and individual studies included in these reviews. Due to the volume of studies identified, a sample of papers published from 2007 to 2015 was collated. A narrative analysis identified whether potential capacity constraints were discussed qualitatively in the studies and, if relevant, which quantitative methods were used to account for capacity constraints.

Results: A total of 45 systematic reviews of economic evaluations of precision medicine were identified, from which 222 studies focusing on test-treat interventions, published between 2007 and 2015, were extracted. Of these studies, 33 (15%) qualitatively discussed the potential impact of capacity constraints, including budget constraints; quality of tests and the testing process; ease of use of tests in clinical practice; and decision uncertainty. Quantitative methods (nine studies) to account for capacity constraints included static methods such as capturing inefficiencies in trials or models and sensitivity analysis around model parameters; and dynamic methods, which allow the impact of capacity constraints on cost effectiveness to change over time.

Conclusions: Understanding the cost effectiveness of precision medicine is necessary, but not sufficient, evidence for its successful implementation. There are currently few examples of evaluations that have quantified the impact of capacity constraints, which suggests an area of focus for future research.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6597608PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-019-00801-9DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

capacity constraints
24
precision medicine
20
economic evaluations
16
evaluations precision
16
impact capacity
16
systematic reviews
8
reviews economic
8
test-treat interventions
8
published 2007
8
2007 2015
8

Similar Publications