Our authors present common round-ups of the most recent peer-reviewed journals. We cowl all problems with main well being economics journals in addition to different notable releases. Go to our journal round-up log to see previous editions organised by publication title. When you’d like to jot down a journal round-up, get in contact.

This concern is dominated by a formidable COVID-19 themed part that includes seven articles and an editorial focussed on the well being economics of COVID-19. The editorial is properly price a learn because it offers a abstract of the important thing findings of the papers featured not simply on this particular COVID-19 themed concern but in addition within the journal’s earlier themed part from November 2020. There are articles contemplating a variety of financial points, together with the cost-effectiveness of various social distancing methods, examination of the QALY losses averted by an infection prevention, and the methodological challenges of decoding imperfect trial knowledge.

A paper by Towse et al. tackled the big and urgent query of how ought to the world pay for a coronavirus illness vaccine? In lots of prosperous international locations, vaccine growth and distribution have made unimaginable progress, while a lot of the world has been left behind. To deal with this, the authors suggest a collaborative market-based finance mechanism for the world to incentivise and pay for the event of, and supply entry to, second and third-generation COVID-19 vaccines. The mechanism builds upon ideas of HTA and cost-effectiveness and is known as the Profit-Primarily based Advance Market Dedication (BBAMC). It’s too advanced to stipulate right here (10 phases!), and the way it might work in observe stays to be seen, however it’s actually a worthwhile contribution.

My private spotlight is the coverage dialogue part, which incorporates just one paper, reviewing 10 years of NICE’s Finish of Life (EoL) standards. That is of nice curiosity personally as it’s notably related to my very own earlier analysis within the EoL context. The EoL standards have at all times felt a bit arbitrary, missing a correct proof base, and prone to have unintended penalties. In essence, they shift the cost-effectiveness threshold from £20,000-£30,000 to £50,000 per QALY ought to sure EoL standards be met. This paper reviewed all NICE single expertise value determinations (STAs) between 2009 and 2019 and extracted knowledge on EoL standards and cost-effectiveness evaluation. The evaluation discovered an absence of consistency and transparency inside STAs concerning EoL standards evaluation. Maybe the least shocking discovering (to a cynic like myself no less than) is that they noticed that almost all EoL applied sciences had been priced between £30,000 to £50,000 per QALY, suggesting that firms might have adjusted their pricing technique to the upper EoL cost-effectiveness threshold [shocked face]. The paper means that new pointers ought to be launched to enhance transparency and consistency, and it supplies numerous strategies on find out how to obtain this.

This concern additionally options three cancer-related financial evaluations; one costing examine for superior breast most cancers, one cost-utility evaluation of various chemotherapy administration strategies for oesophageal most cancers, and one finances impression evaluation of tyrosine kinase inhibitor discontinuation for these with continual myeloid Leukaemia with sustained deep molecular response (not even positive what most of meaning).

There are additionally two preference-based assessments, two systematic opinions, and two methodological papers, one among which considers how finest to cope with lacking knowledge and appears very helpful. General, this can be a bumper concern, and Worth in Well being stays one among my favorite well being economics journals.


  • Antony Theobald (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here