26 February 2019 - For the past two decades, a plethora of organisations identified by various innocuous acronyms (e.g., NICE) has tried to convince policymakers, providers and patients among others that economic analysis or modelling ought to be used to determine drug coverage decisions.

They have tried to define value and insert value as a component into models so that they may analyse the appropriateness of payment for a pharmaceutical. They have instituted arbitrary parameters regarding the inclusion of data in their economic models. They have even tried to sell analytic findings to audiences with promises of substantial savings.

So are these groups wrong in pressing for the use of their economic modelling and analysis in determinations about whether payers ought to cover life-saving medicines?

Read American Council on Science and Health article