1 resultado para Process-dissociation Framework
em Brunel University
Filtro por publicador
- Repository Napier (3)
- Abertay Research Collections - Abertay University’s repository (2)
- Academic Archive On-line (Stockholm University; Sweden) (1)
- Academic Research Repository at Institute of Developing Economies (2)
- AMS Tesi di Dottorato - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (5)
- AMS Tesi di Laurea - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (3)
- Aquatic Commons (2)
- ArchiMeD - Elektronische Publikationen der Universität Mainz - Alemanha (1)
- Archimer: Archive de l'Institut francais de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer (2)
- Archive of European Integration (4)
- Aston University Research Archive (79)
- Biblioteca de Teses e Dissertações da USP (1)
- Biblioteca Digital da Câmara dos Deputados (1)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (4)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (2)
- BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça (28)
- Brock University, Canada (4)
- Brunel University (1)
- Bucknell University Digital Commons - Pensilvania - USA (3)
- Bulgarian Digital Mathematics Library at IMI-BAS (2)
- Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (25)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (29)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences Institutional Repositories Grid Portal (13)
- CiencIPCA - Instituto Politécnico do Cávado e do Ave, Portugal (1)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (2)
- Coffee Science - Universidade Federal de Lavras (1)
- Comissão Econômica para a América Latina e o Caribe (CEPAL) (2)
- CORA - Cork Open Research Archive - University College Cork - Ireland (7)
- Corvinus Research Archive - The institutional repository for the Corvinus University of Budapest (1)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (4)
- DI-fusion - The institutional repository of Université Libre de Bruxelles (1)
- Digital Commons - Michigan Tech (2)
- Digital Commons at Florida International University (21)
- Digital Peer Publishing (4)
- DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center (8)
- Doria (National Library of Finland DSpace Services) - National Library of Finland, Finland (4)
- DRUM (Digital Repository at the University of Maryland) (2)
- Duke University (3)
- Ecology and Society (4)
- Fachlicher Dokumentenserver Paedagogik/Erziehungswissenschaften (1)
- FUNDAJ - Fundação Joaquim Nabuco (3)
- Greenwich Academic Literature Archive - UK (7)
- Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki (14)
- Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - Índia (17)
- Institutional Repository of Leibniz University Hannover (1)
- Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco - Portugal (1)
- Instituto Politécnico de Viseu (1)
- Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal (3)
- Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada - Lisboa (3)
- Iowa Publications Online (IPO) - State Library, State of Iowa (Iowa), United States (1)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1)
- National Center for Biotechnology Information - NCBI (4)
- Nottingham eTheses (2)
- Open University Netherlands (3)
- Plymouth Marine Science Electronic Archive (PlyMSEA) (2)
- Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses - Espanha (1)
- Publishing Network for Geoscientific & Environmental Data (2)
- QSpace: Queen's University - Canada (4)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (43)
- Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive (270)
- RCAAP - Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (1)
- Repositório Científico da Universidade de Évora - Portugal (2)
- Repositório Científico do Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa - Portugal (1)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (2)
- Repositório Institucional da Universidade de Brasília (1)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (15)
- Research Open Access Repository of the University of East London. (1)
- RUN (Repositório da Universidade Nova de Lisboa) - FCT (Faculdade de Cienecias e Technologia), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL), Portugal (3)
- SAPIENTIA - Universidade do Algarve - Portugal (1)
- Universidad de Alicante (6)
- Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (29)
- Universidade Complutense de Madrid (2)
- Universidade de Lisboa - Repositório Aberto (1)
- Universidade Estadual Paulista "Júlio de Mesquita Filho" (UNESP) (2)
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) (3)
- Universitat de Girona, Spain (3)
- Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Universität Kassel, Germany (5)
- Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (3)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (6)
- University of Connecticut - USA (1)
- University of Queensland eSpace - Australia (13)
- University of Southampton, United Kingdom (1)
- University of Washington (5)
- WestminsterResearch - UK (6)
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: In many countries, decisions about the public funding of drugs are preferentially based on the results of randomized trials. For truly rare diseases, such trials are not typically available, and approaches by public payers are highly variable. In view of this, a policy framework intended to fairly evaluate these drugs was developed by the Drugs for Rare Diseases Working Group (DRDWG) at the request of the Ontario Public Drug Programs. OBJECTIVE: To report the initial experience of applying a novel evaluation framework to funding applications for drugs for rare diseases. METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study. MEASURES: Clinical effectiveness, costs, funding recommendations, funding approval. KEY RESULTS: Between March 2008 and February 2013, eight drugs were evaluated using the DRDWG framework. The estimated average annual drug cost per patient ranged from 28,000 to 1,200,000 Canadian dollars (CAD). For five drugs, full evaluations were completed, specific funding recommendations were made by the DRDWG, and funding was approved after risk-sharing agreements with the manufacturers were negotiated. For two drugs, the disease indications were determined to be ineligible for consideration. For one drug, there was insufficient natural history data for the disease to provide a basis for recommendation. For the five drugs fully evaluated, 32 patients met the predefined eligibility criteria for funding, and five were denied based on predefined exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The framework improved transparency and consistency for evaluation and public funding of drugs for rare diseases in Ontario. The evaluation process will continue to be iteratively refined as feedback on actual versus expected clinical and economic outcomes is incorporated. © 2014 Society of General Internal Medicine.