For the second contribution to the blog, I March 2024 Problem To Pharmaceutical. This issue is a generalized linear model to estimate costs using stakeholders participating in economic models, improving health imbalance gaps of value evaluation, and general linear models, and generalized linear models to inform the value -based contract for cells, and modeling using actual data, two system reviews, and two systems review and report reports And reports, reports, reports, and two systems reviews, modeling studies with two systems, modeling studies using two systems, modeling studies, and modeling studies using two systems, and gene therapy using real data, and gene therapy and gene therapy. Economic evaluation. I will focus on the three articles below.
This editing argues that the relevant stakeholders must be involved in co -production in order for the model to be suitable for the purpose. Some articles are cited to support the author’s view of the positive advantage that stakeholders participate in decision -making. The editorial is imbalanced because it focuses only on positive things without mentioning negative things. The author ends with a statement that a model with no participation in stakeholders must have at least an immunity clause.
In principle, I agree. Related Stakeholders must be involved in the development of economic models, especially when developed to provide information to public decisions. But this article makes some strong arguments, including lack of participation in stakeholders. “We leave a role in Modellers’ own values, which can be affected by their beliefs, experience and propensity or to be determined by their social situations.This is not only very difficult to find an economic model developed with lonely modulators or two or two, but also seems to be very difficult to claim that Modellers includes its own value in the model development, considering its standard method loan process, and a model that is constantly inputting models used in decision -making developed by one or two modulars. I think there is no.
To cite a famous person, ‘All models are wrong, but some are useful.’ This article also seems to be useful to ensure the participation of stakeholders in order to make the model useful. Even models developed through the multi -field team will not always be helpful for decision making.
Overall, I think that the premise of editorials is reasonable, but it provides a fairly negative view of economic modernity.
Research framework to improve the gap in the health imbalance of value evaluation
This opinion argues that the economic model does not capture the difference in the current health imbalance. This is true. The author says that the difference is not captured because the current method focuses on the cost of the author and the quality of life, and then proposes a framework that provides information by three separate stages to solve this difference. (1) The context of living experiences in unfavorable communities; (2) Personal level quantification of health imbalance for measurement of cost and quality of life; (3) Quantify the impact of the community level. The use of individual level data can lead to a very complex value evaluation, so the author will expand this research and actually prove the use of this framework.
Using the actual data to inform the value -based contract for the cell and gene therapy of Medicaid
As you know, some of you like high -end treatment products. So they form the foundation of my doctoral program. This study uses the actual medicade data to determine the actual cost of the two gene therapy in hemophilia A and hemophilia B from the point of view of Colorado Medicaid. The cost analysis was used to estimate the Medicaid cost when the patient switched to genetic therapy using the Colorado Health Policy and the 2018–2022 data of the Financial Services Bureau, and used the simulation model using the simulation model. The main measures were the annual terms, cost offset and advantages when using gene therapy. This method was not clearly explained, but essentially, they focused only on costs by developing a divided survival analysis that compares treatment with gene therapy and treatment with treatment standard treatment. The title means that the author uses these data to inform the value -based contract, but not. The results are not original. There are significant uncertainty for gene treatment costs and extended investment recovery periods. Implied, this article argues that all related value elements for cells and gene therapy are not considered in Medicaid, and the cost offset calculation using this data can determine the value of cells and gene therapy. It’s true, but with only value limited to certain factors.
