↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility and attractiveness of indication value-based pricing in key EU countries

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Market Access & Health Policy, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 102)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Feasibility and attractiveness of indication value-based pricing in key EU countries
Published in
Journal of Market Access & Health Policy, May 2016
DOI 10.3402/jmahp.v4.30970
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Indication value-based pricing (IBP) has been proposed in the United States as a tool to capture the differential value of drugs across indications or patient groups and is in the early phases of implementation. In Europe, no major country has experimented with IBP or is seriously discussing its use. We assessed how the reimbursement and pricing environment allows for IBP in seven European countries, evaluating both incentives and hurdles. In price setting countries such as France and Germany, the Health Technology Assessment and pricing process already accounts for differences of value across indications. In countries where differential value drives coverage decisions such as the United Kingdom and Sweden, IBP is likely to be used, at least partially, but not in the short-term. Italy is already achieving some form of differential value through managed entry agreements, whereas in Spain the electronic prescription system provides the infrastructure necessary for IBP but other hurdles exist.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Other 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 30 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 35 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 May 2025.
All research outputs
#6,981,149
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Market Access & Health Policy
#45
of 102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,868
of 305,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Market Access & Health Policy
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 305,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.