| Title |
Reimbursement Decisions for Pharmaceuticals in Sweden: The Impact of Disease Severity and Cost Effectiveness
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-015-0307-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mikael Svensson, Fredrik O. L. Nilsson, Karl Arnberg |
| Abstract |
The Swedish Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV) is the government body responsible for deciding whether outpatient drugs are to be included in the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. This paper analyzes the impact of cost effectiveness and severity of disease on reimbursement decisions for new pharmaceuticals. Data has been extracted from all decisions made by the TLV between 2005 and 2011. Cost effectiveness is measured as the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, whereas disease severity is a binary variable (severe-not severe). In total, the dataset consists of 102 decisions, with 86 approved and 16 declined reimbursements. The lowest cost per QALY of declined reimbursements is Swedish kronor (SEK) 700,000 (<euro>79,100), while the highest cost per QALY of approved reimbursements is SEK1,220,000 (<euro>135,600). At a cost per QALY of SEK702,000 Swedish kronor (non-severe diseases) and SEK988,000 (severe diseases), the likelihood of approval is estimated to be 50/50 (<euro>79,400 and <euro>111,700). The TLV places substantial weight on both the cost effectiveness and the severity of disease in reimbursement decisions, and the implied willingness to pay for a QALY is higher than the often cited 'rule of thumb' in Swedish policy debates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 25% |
| Researcher | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 20% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 11 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 24 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,745,997
of 25,292,646 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#105
of 1,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,106
of 270,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#3
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,646 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.