Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Methodological guidelines for conducting economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Hungary: a Hungarian proposal for methodology standards

  • Invited papers
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Az Egèszsègügyi Minisztèrium szakmai irànyelve az egèszsèg-gazdasagtani elemzèsek kèszitèsèhez (2002) Egèszsègügyi Közlöny, vol LII/11,pp 1314–1334

    Google Scholar 

  2. Szende A, Pallos G (2000) Comparison of international methodological guidelines on conducting cost-effectiveness studies (in Hungarian), Egészségügyi Gazdasági Szemle 38:5:469–482

    Google Scholar 

  3. OECD (2000) Health data.Comparative analysis of 29 countries.CREDES.OECD

  4. Maynard A (1991) Developing the health care market. Econ J 101:1277–1286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Drummond ME, O'Brein B, Stoddard GL, Torrance GW (1999) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 2nd edn.Oxford: Oxford Medical

    Google Scholar 

  6. Williams A (2000) Measuring quality of life: why and how (in Hungarian)? Egészségügyi Gazdasági Szemle 38:3:239–248

    Google Scholar 

  7. Siegel JE, Torrance GW, Russel LB, et al (1997) Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic studies. Recommendations from the Panel on Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Pharmacoeconomics 11:159–168

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ontario Ministry of Health (1994) Ontario guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Health

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (1999) Guidelines for preparation of an account of health-economic aspects.Finland

  10. Portuguese Pharmacy and Medicines Institute (1998) Orientações metodológicas para estudos de avaliação económica de medicamentos. Portugal: INFARMED

    Google Scholar 

  11. Langley PC (1999) Formulary guidelines for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Colorado and Nevada. Pharmacoeconomics 16:211–224

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Anonymous (n.d.) Irish health technology assessment guidelines, draft version 2.National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics in Ireland

  13. Food and Drug Administration (1995) Draft guidelines.Principles for review of pharmacoeconomic promotion. Washington: FDA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bundesamt für Sozialversicherung (1995) Swiss Manual for the standardisation of clinical and economic evaluation of medical technology, second draft.Switzerland: Bundesamt für Sozialversicherung

    Google Scholar 

  15. Belgian Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (1995) A Proposal for methodological guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Belgium: BESPE

    Google Scholar 

  16. Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (1997) Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals, 2nd edn.Ottawa: CCOHTA

    Google Scholar 

  17. Collège des Economistes de la Santé (1997) Guidelines and recommendations for French pharmaco-economic studies. France: Collège des Economistes de la Santé

    Google Scholar 

  18. Garattini L, Grilli R, Scopelliti D, Mantovani L (1995) A proposal for Italian guidelines in pharmacoeconomics.Pharmacoeconomics 7:1–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Shulenberg J-M Graf von dem, et al (1995) Hanover guidelines for economic evaluation of health services (original title: Hannover Guidelines für die ökonomische Evaluation von Gesundheitsgütern und -dienstleistungen). Institut für Versicherungsbetriebslehre, Diskussionspapier no 10.Pharmazeutische Industrie 57:265–268

    Google Scholar 

  20. Task Force on the Economic Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals (1995) Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research.Washington: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America

  21. Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology (1995) Economic analysis of health care technology. A report on principles. Ann Intern Med 122:61–70

    Google Scholar 

  22. Australia Commonwealth Department of Health, Housing and Community Services (1995) Guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Canberra: Commonwealth Department

    Google Scholar 

  23. Danish Ministry of Health (1995) Sundhedsøkonomiske evalueringer af lægemidler, draft. Denmark: Danish Ministry of Health

    Google Scholar 

  24. (1998) Pharmacoeconomic guidelines, draft. The Netherlands: Dutch Ministry of Public Health,Welfare and Sport

  25. National Institute for Clinical Excellence (2001) Technical guidance for manufacturers and sponsors on making a submission to a technology appraisal. UK: NICE

    Google Scholar 

  26. Norwegian Medicines Control Authority (1998) Forslag til Norske retningslinjer for legemiddeløkonomiske analyser i forbindelse med søknad om refusjon på blåresept. Oslo: Norwegian Medicines Control Authority

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rovira J, Antonanzas F (1995) Economic analysis of health technologies and programmes. A Spanish proposal for methodological standardisation Pharmacoeconomics 8:245–252

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. PHARMAC (1999) A prescription for pharmacoeconomic analysis, version 1.PHARMAC

  29. Mogyorosy, ZS (2001) Evidence based medicine - the new paradigm for the XXI. century. Anno 2000.Orvostudomány Magyarországon. Springer,Budapest,pp 101–112

    Google Scholar 

  30. NHS Centre for Review and Dissemination (2001) Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. CRD report 4, 2nd edn.York: University of York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Department of Health and Aged Care (2000) Interim document to accompany the guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the pharmaceutical benefits advisory committee.Australia: Department of Health and Aged Care

    Google Scholar 

  32. NHS Centre for Review and Dissemination (1996) Making cost-effectiveness information accessible: the NHS economic evaluation database, CRD report 6.York: University of York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rittenhouse B (1996) Uses of models in economic evaluations of medicines and other health technologies.London: Office of Health Economics, BSC print

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sheldon T (1996) Problems of using modelling in the economic evaluation of health care. Health Econ 5:1–11

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nuijten MJC, Pronk M, Brorens MJA (1998) Reporting format for economic evaluation. II.Focus on modelling studies. Pharmacoeconomics 14:259–268

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC (1996) Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine.New York: Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  37. Code Up-dating Working Committee Ministry of Health (2000) Methodological guideline for measurement of resource-consumption to update of reimbursement parameters of health services.Ministry of Health

  38. CDHHCS (1993) Background document on the use of economic analysis as a basis for inclusion of pharmaceutical products on the pharmaceutical benefit scheme.Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service

  39. Liljas B (1998) How to calculate indirect costs in economic evaluations.Pharmacoeconomics 13(1)

  40. Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FFH (1997) A practical guide for calculating indirect costs of disease. Pharmacoeconomics 10:460–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ministry of Health (2000) Price information in the healthcare sector.Price Information Bulletin.Budapest: Ministry of Health

    Google Scholar 

  42. Central Statistical Office (2000) Annual statistical yearbook.Budapest: Ministry of Health

    Google Scholar 

  43. Trueman P, Drummond M, Hutton J (2001) Developing guidance for budget impact analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 19:609–621

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medtap Internationa, Amsterdam Office, Molenpad 4, 1546, LC Jisp, The Netherlands

    Ágota Szende

  2. University of York, York, UK

    Ágota Szende

  3. Ministry of Finance, Budapest, Hungary

    Z. Mogyorósy & N. Muszbek

  4. Information Centre for Healthcare (GYÓGYINFOK), Szekszárd, Hungary

    J. Nagy

  5. Ministry of Health, Budapest, Hungary

    G. Pallos

  6. National Health Insurance Fund, Budapest, Hungary

    C Dözsa

Authors
  1. Ágota Szende
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Z. Mogyorósy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Muszbek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Nagy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Pallos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C Dözsa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ágota Szende.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Szende, Á., Mogyorósy, Z., Muszbek, N. et al. Methodological guidelines for conducting economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Hungary: a Hungarian proposal for methodology standards. Eur J Health Econom 3, 196–206 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-002-0109-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-002-0109-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation