Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Health technology assessments in England: an analysis of the NICE Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme

  • Editorial
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. On the other hand, the MTEP guidance may be more acceptable in certain non-UK countries, such as France and Germany, where there is no attempt to measure health benefits in a standardised way. However, these countries do place a great emphasis on the need for evidence from RCTs and are reluctant to base decisions on the reimbursement of new technologies on alternative data sources, as the MTEP does.

References

  1. Raftery, J.: Review of NICE’s recommendations, 1995–2005. BMJ 332, 1266–1268 (2006)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Drummond, M., Schwartz, J., Jonsson, B., Luce, B., Neumann, P., Siebert, U., Sullivan, S.: Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 24(3), 244–258 (2008)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. NICE: A guide to NICE. NICE, London (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sorenson, C., Tarricone, R., Siebert, U., Drummond, M.: Applying health economics for policy decision making: do devices differ from drugs? Europace 13, 54–58 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. NICE: Medical technologies evaluation programme—methods guide. http://www.nice.org.uk/media/3A6/09/MedicalTechnologiesEvaluationProgrammeMethodsGuideMarch2012.pdf (2011). Accessed 21 Oct 2012

  6. Drummond, M., Sculpher, M., Torrance, G., O’Brien, B., Stoddart, G.: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. NICE: Medical technologies evaluation programme—process guide. http://www.nice.org.uk/media/3A6/14/MedicalTechnologiesEvaluationProgrammeProcessGuideMarch2012.pdf (2011). Accessed 21 Oct 2012

  8. Cookson, R., Hutton, J.: Regulating the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals and medical devices: a European perspective. Health Policy 63, 167–178 (2003)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Taylor, R., Iglesias, C.: Assessing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of medical devices and drugs: are they that different? Value Health 12(4), 404–406 (2009)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. NICE: Technology appraisals topic selection. http://www.nice.org.uk/getinvolved/topicselection/TechnologyAppraisalTopicSelection.jsp(2011). Accessed 24 June 2011

  11. NICE: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. http://publications.nice.org.uk/guide-to-the-methods-of-technology-appraisal-2013-pmg9 (2013). Accessed 4 April 2013

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, Market Square, Heslington, York, YO10 5NH, UK

    William Green

  2. Medipex Ltd., Pure Offices Ltd, 4100 Park Approach, Thrope Park, Leeds, LS15 8GB, UK

    William Green

  3. Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK

    John Hutton

Authors
  1. William Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Hutton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Green.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Green, W., Hutton, J. Health technology assessments in England: an analysis of the NICE Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme. Eur J Health Econ 15, 449–452 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0539-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0539-3

Search

Navigation