Healthy Skepticism Library item: 11717

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Poole C.
NICE transparency: Let cost effectiveness models be open to scrutiny
BMJ 2007 Oct 13; 335:(7623):735
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/short/335/7623/735?etoc

Abstract:

In light of the recent ruling over the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence’s (NICE) decision on donezepil,1 2 we wish to comment on the adversarial system of drug evaluation and the inadequacy of NICE providing read-only versions of cost effectiveness models for the purposes of reviewing their decisions.

The assertion that “[NICE] is not in a position to deal with the reality of restrictions being placed on [the models] by those who supply them“2 is not defensible. NICE could specify terms and conditions to technology assessment groups (TAGs) to allow full disclosure of what, after all, is publicly funded research. Indeed, they should be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act, with non-disclosure acceptable only when in the public interest.

Recently, the Sheffield TAG published a correction to a cost effectiveness model for multiple sclerosis treatment caused by a coding error.3 This model underpinned a high profile and novel . . .

drchrispoole@googlemail.com