↓ Skip to main content

An Overview of the Reimbursement Decision-Making Processes in Bulgaria As a Reference Country for the Middle-Income European Countries

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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.
Title
An Overview of the Reimbursement Decision-Making Processes in Bulgaria As a Reference Country for the Middle-Income European Countries
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Kamusheva, Mariya Vassileva, Alexandra Savova, Manoela Manova, Guenka Petrova

Abstract

Policy makers face a lot of challenges in the process of drug reimbursement decision-making, especially in the context of entering the market of more and more innovative medicinal products (MPs). The aim of the current study is to make an overview of the reimbursement system development and to evaluate the access of innovative medicines, which have entered the EU-market in the period 2015-2017, in Bulgaria as reference example for middle-income European country. A literature and a legislative systematic review regarding the Bulgarian reimbursement system as well as a defining the number of available innovative reimbursed MPs in 2017 in Bulgaria was made. The reimbursement legislation in Bulgaria is quite unstable due to constant changes, which have been made, especially in the recent years. Despite this fact, the reimbursement process in Bulgaria is in accordance with the Transparency Directive. Bulgarian patients have a relatively delayed access to innovative medicines as only 5% of centrally authorized MPs in 2017 are available in the positive drug list (PDL), 16% of all in 2016 and 18%-in 2015. This could be explained by the long procedure for their appraisal in Bulgaria: the first step is issuing an opinion by the HTA Committee, followed by negotiation of discounts between the marketing authorization holder and the National Health Insurance Fund and making a final decision by the National Council on Prices and Reimbursement (NCPR) for the inclusion into the PDL. Optimization of the procedure for issuing reimbursement status for innovative MPs is needed, such as improvements in the process of conducting HTA reports and their appraisal, incorporation of adequate systems for following the effectiveness and safety of MPs in the real-world conditions, value-based pricing implementation, and increasing the financial control over the health insurance system.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 16 35%
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 25 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,209,728
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,322
of 9,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,962
of 331,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#59
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,794 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 331,299 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.