Journal of Medical Economics最新文献

{"title":"Real-world healthcare resource utilization of Alzheimer's disease in the early and advanced stages: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Elnara Fazio-Eynullayeva, Marianne Cunnington, Paul Mystkowski, Lei Lv, Abdalla Aly, Christopher W Yee, Raj Desai, Chia-Lun Liu, Mei Sheng Duh, Soeren Mattke","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2024.2442240","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2024.2442240","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To compare all-cause and Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) by cognitive stage.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>This retrospective study analyzed insurance claims data linked to electronic health records (01/01/2015-12/31/2021). Patients with ≥1 cognitive assessment (Mini-Mental State Examination or Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and ≥1 medical or pharmacy claim for an AD diagnosis or AD medications were included. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to address potential confounding. All-cause and AD-related HCRU were summarized per patient per year (PPPY) and compared between early AD and advanced AD cohorts (defined according to cognitive scores) using generalized linear regression models; adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 193 patients were included (median age: 82 years; 63.2% female), 108 with early AD and 85 with advanced AD, with similar mean follow up. All-cause HCRU, on average, was similar between early AD and advanced AD cohorts (37.4 PPPY and 38.9 encounters PPPY, respectively). For AD-related HCRU, patients with early AD had fewer encounters PPPY, on average, than patients with advanced AD (1.26 and 3.88 encounters, respectively). Following IPTW adjustment, the advanced AD cohort had significantly higher overall AD-related HCRU (IRR: 3.64 [95% CI: 1.96-6.75], <i>p</i> < 0.001) and outpatient visits (IRR: 2.76 [95% CI: 1.68-4.54], <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to the early AD cohort.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The relatively small sample size of patients with linked claims and cognitive score data limited the ability to assess contribution of all encounter types to HCRU trends, as well as generalizability to the broader AD population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although all-cause HCRU was similar, patients with advanced AD incurred higher AD-related HCRU compared to patients living with early AD. Further research is needed to determine whether interventions earlier in disease progression can mitigate the AD-related healthcare burden for patients with advanced AD.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"81-88"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142818343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Economic impact associated with dronedarone use in patients with atrial fibrillation.","authors":"Zenobia Dotiwala, Julian Casciano, Gary Lebovics, Ron Preblick","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2459499","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2459499","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective/aim: </strong>In 2009, dronedarone was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration based on results from the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785), which showed significant reduction of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization and death in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) randomized to dronedarone versus placebo. In 2020, a retrospective study by Goehring et al. showed CV hospitalizations and deaths were lower in clinical practice following initiation of dronedarone compared to other antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with AF and atrial flutter. However, the economic impact associated with dronedarone use has not been fully assessed. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost associated with CV outcomes reported by Goehring et al. (2020).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>National average Medicare payments in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database (www.data.CMS.gov) were used to assign cost estimates to CV outcomes evaluated in Goehring et al. (2020) by diagnosis-related grouping. When costs were unavailable in the CMS database, a literature search was performed to identify publications reporting hospitalization costs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The weighted average cost for CV hospitalization was calculated to be $20,508. When multiplied by the event rate reported in Goehring et al. (2020), cost per person year for CV hospitalization was 14% lower with dronedarone versus other AADs ($3,679 vs $4,272, respectively). For hospitalizations due to heart failure, cost was 31% lower with dronedarone compared with other AADs ($324 vs $472, respectively).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Costs have been calculated based on national averages reported by CMS (Medicare perspective) and are estimates. Regional differences may be present.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with AF taking dronedarone had lower costs associated with CV hospitalization compared with patients taking other AADs.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"245-250"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143052649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction.","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2477875","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2477875","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":"28 1","pages":"377"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143605202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"US consumer and healthcare professional preferences for combination COVID-19 and influenza vaccines.","authors":"Christine Poulos, Philip O Buck, Parinaz Ghaswalla, Deborah Rudin, Cannon Kent, Darshan Mehta","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2462412","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2462412","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To quantify preferences for an adult combination vaccine for influenza and COVID-19 (flu + COVID) compared with standalone influenza and COVID-19 vaccines.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This survey study used a series of direct-elicitation questions to assess preferences for a single-shot combination flu + COVID, standalone influenza, and standalone COVID-19 vaccines among US consumers (<i>N</i> = 601) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (<i>N</i> = 299). Response frequencies described the proportion of each sample that would prefer a flu + COVID vaccine to standalone influenza and COVID-19 vaccines. A multivariate logit regression model explored how certain characteristics influenced the odds of selecting the flu + COVID vaccine over a standalone influenza vaccine.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most consumers (398/601; 66.2%) and HCPs (250/298; 83.9%) preferred a flu + COVID vaccine to a standalone influenza vaccine. When not forced to choose between flu + COVID and standalone influenza vaccines, most consumers again selected the flu + COVID vaccine (62.3%); 14.7% would prefer separate standalone influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, 8.3% a standalone influenza vaccine only, 7.3% a COVID-19 vaccine only, and 7.4% neither vaccine. Consumers aged ≥50 years with a body mass index ≥40, those aged ≥65 years who previously received a COVID-19 vaccine, and those who had previously experienced severe impacts from influenza were more likely to choose a flu + COVID vaccine over a standalone influenza vaccine than were consumers without these characteristics. HCPs whose practice stocks high-dose influenza vaccines were more likely to choose the flu + COVID vaccine for patients aged ≥65 with no risk factors and patients aged 18-64 with ≥1 risk factor over the standalone influenza vaccine.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Results are subject to potential hypothetical, responder, selection, and information biases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most US consumers and HCPs would likely prefer a single-shot combination flu + COVID vaccine compared with standalone influenza and COVID-19 vaccines. Given the low COVID-19 vaccination coverage rates in the US, the availability of a combination flu + COVID vaccine could help increase COVID-19 vaccine coverage.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":"28 1","pages":"279-290"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143458288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of Haemate-P versus other von Willebrand disease treatments in Spain.","authors":"Juan E Megias-Vericat, Gines Escolar, Michele R Wilson, Pablo Mendez, Cheryl L McDade, Laura Vidal Barrientos, Radovan Tomic, Marco Panebianco, Stephan Linden, Songkai Yan","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2474886","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2474886","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>von Willebrand Disease (vWD) is the most common congenital bleeding disorder, with an estimated prevalence in Spain of 0.01%. The aim was to assess the cost-utility of Haemate-P compared with present alternatives in the treatment of vWD in Spain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model was developed in Microsoft Excel to estimate the cost-effectiveness of various treatments for vWD over a lifetime horizon. Transition probabilities among health states were based on age and number of bleeding events. Treatment strategies compared included Haemate-P, Fanhdi, and Wilate in long-term prophylaxis (LTP) or on-demand treatment (ODT). Costs and quality-of-life were measured based on patient age, treatment, and number of bleeding events incurred. Both costs and utilities were discounted at 3%. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When comparing LTP regimens, Haemate-P was less costly and numerically more effective than both Fanhdi (incremental costs = -€1,313,845; incremental quality-adjusted life-years [QALY] = 0.13) and Wilate (incremental costs = -€2,233,940; incremental QALY = 0.29). For ODT, Haemate-P was assumed to have equal effectiveness as Fanhdi and Wilate but reduced the costs by €696,857 and €1,145,780, respectively. Haemate-P prophylaxis was more effective and less costly compared with Haemate-P on-demand in the base case (incremental costs = -€633,317; incremental QALY = 0.90). Results were generally robust to sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with severe vWD experiencing a high bleed rate, Haemate-P prophylaxis is a less costly and potentially more effective treatment strategy and Haemate-P is cost-saving among on-demand strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"436-445"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143572833","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The real-world impact of cariprazine on short- and long-term disability outcomes among commercially insured patients in the United States.","authors":"Prakash S Masand, Mousam Parikh, Jamie Ta, Enrico Zanardo, Dominique Lejeune, Cristina Martínez, François Laliberté, Nadia Nabulsi","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2470014","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2470014","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare all-cause and mental health (MH)-related short-term and long-term disability leaves and associated costs among patients in the United States with bipolar disorder (BP), major depressive disorder (MDD), or schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SCZ) before versus after cariprazine initiation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Merative MarketScan Commercial and Health and Productivity Management (HPM) databases (January 2016 to December 2021) were utilized to identify adults diagnosed with BP, MDD, or SCZ with ≥2 pharmacy cariprazine claims (first claim = index), ≥3 months of cariprazine use (adjunctively for MDD), and continuous commercial insurance coverage and HPM eligibility during baseline (12 months pre-index) and ≥3 months post-index. Observation continued until cariprazine discontinuation, insurance or HPM eligibility end, 1 year post-index, or HPM data availability end. All-cause and MH-related disability claims, days, and costs were evaluated. Baseline versus post-index rates of disability claims (events) and days were compared using rate ratios (RR); costs were compared using mean cost differences. Comparisons were calculated from generalized estimating equation models. Analyses were replicated separately across indications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 489 patients overall (BP = 238, MDD = 233, SCZ = 18; mean age = 43.3 years; 60.7% female; mean follow-up = 7.6 months). All-cause rates of disability events and days following cariprazine initiation were 29% (RR = 0.71 [95% CI = 0.57, 0.86]) and 28% (0.72 [0.53, 0.94]) lower than baseline, respectively (both <i>p</i> < .05). MH-related rates of disability events and days were 40% (0.60 [0.43, 0.80]) and 43% (0.57 [0.34, 0.84]) lower, respectively (both <i>p</i> < .01). All-cause disability costs were $2,917 lower and MH-related disability costs were $2,482 lower than baseline (40% and 51% decrease, respectively; both <i>p</i> < .01). Results were similar for indication-specific analyses.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Limited generalizability to patients who are unemployed, uninsured, or have public insurance.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Rates of disability events, days, and mean costs were significantly lower after versus before cariprazine initiation. These results can help contextualize cariprazine's role in managing disability for these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"335-345"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143449305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cost-efficiency and expanded access modeling of conversion to biosimilar bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal and non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer in Medicare.","authors":"Joshua A Roth, David Kratochvil, Stephanie Dorman, Mark Bernauer","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2474884","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2474884","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Biosimilars to originator bevacizumab (Avastin), such as bevacizumab-bvzr (Zirabev), can deliver substantial savings and/or expanded access to biologic therapy for patients with metastatic colorectal (mCRC) and non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). The objective of this study is to explore the cost-efficiency and budget-neutral expanded access of bevacizumab-bvzr in mCRC and mNSCLC in Medicare.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a Medicare payer perspective simulation model of patients treated for mCRC and mNSCLC to estimate cost-savings from converting bevacizumab (originator) to bevacizumab-bvzr or alternative biosimilars such as bevacizumab-awwb, -maly, and -abcd. The target patient population receiving annual first-line systemic therapy was calculated using Medicare enrollment data, SEER cancer incidence rates in patients age ≥65, and an assumption that 39.3% and 77.2% of new diagnoses receive systemic therapy for mCRC and mNSCLC respectively based on recent evidence. 76.0% of systemically treated mCRC patients and 11.4% of incident mNSCLC patients were expected to be treated with bevacizumab-based regimens based on recent evidence. Costs were derived from the 2024 Average Sales Price (ASP). Results include per-patient per-month (PPPM) cost savings (vs. originator), total monthly savings in the cohort, and number needed to convert (NNC) to biosimilar to fund the treatment of an additional 100 patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>PPPM savings from conversion to bevacizumab-bvzr were $4,205 in mCRC and $8,410 in mNSCLC. In 100% conversion scenarios, full cohort monthly savings were $27,664,432 in mCRC (<i>n</i> = 6,579) and $32,319,323 in mNSCLC (<i>n</i> = 3,843), respectively. At 100% conversion, monthly savings from biosimilar conversion could fund up to 13,887 additional mCRC patient-months of treatment with bevacizumab-bvzr + FOLFOX, and up to 8,959 additional mNSCLC patient-months of treatment with bevacizumab-bvzr + paclitaxel + carboplatin. In mCRC and mNSCLC the biosimilar NNC from the originator was 47 and 43, respectively. The biosimilar NNC from other biosimilars ranged from 60-4,564 and 55-4,422 for mCRC and NSCLC, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the first cost-efficiency and expanded access study of biosimilar bevacizumab in mCRC and mNSCLC, we find that bevacizumab-bvzr-based regimens can result in substantial cost savings relative to originator-based first line treatment in Medicare. These cost savings could be reinvested to treat a substantial number of additional patients with mCRC or mNSCLC, or fund other costs of care in Medicare, on a budget-neutral basis.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"378-386"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143542360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in Colombia.","authors":"Juan Urrego-Reyes, Carlos Marrugo Arnedo, Hernan Jaramillo, Oscar Eduardo Realpe, Monica Maria Rojas, Anubhav Patel, Christopher Black, Rebekah Borse","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2510807","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2510807","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/aims: </strong>KEYNOTE-048 (KN-048), a phase III clinical trial was conducted in first-line patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). It demonstrated that pembrolizumab, when combined with platinum-based therapies (cisplatin or carboplatin) plus 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) in the overall population, and in the combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1 population, improves overall survival (OS) compared to the combination of cetuximab + platinum + 5-FU (EXTREME regime). The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab as a combination therapy in the 1 L HNSCC CPS ≥ 1 sub-population compared to the EXTREME regime from a healthcare system perspective in Colombia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We built a three-state partitioned survival model to project the costs and outcomes over 40 years assuming a 3% annual discount. We used data from KEYNOTE-048 to model fits for progression-free survival (PFS), OS and Time-on-treatment curves for 1 L. Parametric extrapolations were then employed for the second part of the fit. The time-point selection was based on a series of statistical criteria including the chow test and log-hazard functions as well as an examination of remaining event within the tail of the curves. The parametric curve fits were guided by a comparison of real-world data, AIC/BIC criteria as well as visual inspection. Cost data for both first-line and subsequent treatments were derived from national public drug and procedures lists, namely SISMED and ISS Tariff Manual. Utilities were derived from KEYNOTE-048 Euro-QoL five dimension, using an Argentina-specific algorithm.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An additional 2.05 life-years (LY) and 1.62 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were the result versus comparator. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were COP $48,330,146/LY gained and COP $61,078,685/QALY gained, which were lower than the 2023 Colombian willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (COP $69,150,201).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pembrolizumab combination therapy offers substantial survival and QALY gains for R/M HNSCC patients with an ICER lower than the Colombian willingness to pay making it a cost-effective treatment in Colombia.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"823-834"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144142730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Systematic review of cost-effectiveness modelling studies for haemophilia.","authors":"Niklaus Meier, Daniel Ammann, Mark Pletscher, Jano Probst, Matthias Schwenkglenks","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2024.2444157","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2024.2444157","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Haemophilia is a rare genetic disease that hinders blood clotting. We aimed to review model-based cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of haemophilia treatments, describe the sources of clinical evidence used by these CEAs, summarize the reported cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies, and assess the quality and risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic literature review of model-based CEAs of haemophilia treatments by searching databases, the Tufts Medical Center CEA registry, and grey literature. We summarized and qualitatively synthesized the approaches and results of the included CEAs, without a meta-analysis due the diversity of the studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>32 eligible studies were performed in 12 countries and reported 53 pairwise comparisons. Most studies analysed patients with haemophilia A rather than haemophilia B. Comparisons of prophylactic versus on-demand treatment indicated that prophylaxis may not be cost-effective, but there was no clear consensus. Emicizumab was generally cost-effective compared with clotting factor treatments and was always dominant for patients with inhibitors. Immune tolerance induction following a Malmö protocol was found to be cost-effective compared to bypassing agents, while there was no consensus for the other protocols. Gene therapies as well as treatment with extended half-life coagulation factors were always cost-effective over their comparators. Studies were highly heterogenous regarding their time horizons, model structures, the inclusion of bleeding-related mortality and quality-of-life impacts. This heterogeneity limited the comparability of the studies. 19 of the 32 included studies received industry funding, which may have biased their results.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>It was not possible to perform a quantitative synthesis of the results due to the heterogeneity of the underlying studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Differences in results between previous CEAs may have been driven by heterogeneity in modelling approaches, clinical input data, and potential funding biases. A more consistent evidence base and modelling approach would enhance the comparability between CEAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"89-104"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142854539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Bridging the gap in public healthcare services in developing countries: lessons from the family doctor contract services in China.","authors":"Mohammad Habibullah Pulok","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2480479","DOIUrl":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2480479","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"445-447"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143649278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}