The National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC) is a health policy research organization dedicated to the advancement of good evidence and science, and to fostering an environment in the United States that supports medical innovation.
- Accountable Care Organizations
- Alternative Payment Models
- Biopharmaceutical Innovation
- Clinical Pathways
- Elements of Value
- Evidence for Decision Making
- Good Practices for Evidence
- (-) Health Care Quality Measures
- Health Spending
- (-) Health Spend Management
- High-Deductible Health Plans
- Impact on Outcome & Spending
- Individual Treatment Effects & Personalized Access
- NPC News
- Pandemic Response
- Patient Centered Formulary & Benefit Design
- Patient Cost Sharing
- Paying for Cures
- Policy & Regulatory Barriers
- Real-World Data
- Real-World Evidence
- Regulatory Barriers & Challenges
- Understanding Health Spending
- Utilization Management & Step Therapy
- Value-Based Contracts
- Value-Based Insurance Design
- Value Assessment
- (-) Value Assessment Frameworks
- Value Assessment Methods
Showing 26 Results
Stakeholder perception of pharmaceutical value: A multicriteria decision analysis pilot case study for value assessment in the United States
Study shows the impact of a more holistic approach to assessing value and how it can help address gaps within conventional value assessment.
Characterizing Health Plan Evidence Review Practices
The study finds that some plans updated the evidence in their coverage policies for specialty medicines more often than others, and the type of evidence plans cited in their coverage policies…
Health Care Spending Effectiveness: Estimates Suggest that Spending Improved U.S. Health from 1996 to 2016
This research assessed the effectiveness of U.S. health care spending by comparing changes in health outcomes and found that, overall, innovations in health care are creating more cost-effective care…
Health Care Spending Guiding Principles
NPC established a set of principles to assess health care spending estimates and policies to ensure alignment with the goals of patient-centered care.
The Dollar or Disease Burden: Caps on Healthcare Spending May Save Money, but at What “Cost” to Patients?
This study assessed the potential effects of budget caps design on disease burden and cost savings to help budget decision makers understand which budget cap features minimize impact to patient…
Improving Patient-reported Measures in Oncology: A Call to Action
This study explores the current landscape of oncology patient-reported measures (PRMs), which are tools that capture patients’ voices related to their care experience and outcomes.
Do Patient Preferences Align with Value Frameworks? A Discrete-Choice Experiment of Patients with Breast Cancer
The study assessed patient preferences for aspects of breast-cancer treatments to evaluate the usual assumptions in scoring rubrics for value frameworks.
Underestimating the Value of an Intervention – The Case for Including Productivity in Value Assessments and Formulary Design
Research shows that including non-health care costs like productivity in value assessment frameworks can change the value assessment of interventions, impact on coverage decisions and subsequent…
Current Landscape: Value Assessment Frameworks
This report analyzed seven existing U.S. value assessment frameworks, comparing and contrasting the strengths and limitations associated with each framework.
As Value Assessments Evolve, Are They Ready for Prime Time?
This peer-reviewed study examined the evolution of the value assessment landscape in the United States.
Improving Patient-reported Measures in Oncology
This is a landscape analysis of available patient-reported measures and patient-reported performance measures in oncology and offers recommendations for filling gaps in measures and removing barriers…
What's Been the Bang for the Buck? Cost-Effectiveness of Health Care Spending Across Selected Conditions in the US
This study was designed to assess whether increased medical intervention spending on prevalent chronic conditions has been a good investment over time.
Why Value Framework Assessments Arrive at Different Conclusions: A Multiple Myeloma Case Study
Researchers conducted cross-framework comparisons of multiple myeloma assessments using four value assessment frameworks and examined the consistency of findings across three case studies.
Improving Oncology Quality Measurement in Accountable Care
This comprehensive white paper from the National Pharmaceutical Council and Discern Health identified gaps in accountable care quality measure sets for cancer, which can lead to missed opportunities…
Value Assessment Frameworks: Are They Up To The Challenge?
In this article published on the Health Affairs Blog, NPC researchers Dr. Robert Dubois and Kimberly Westrich ask: Are value assessment frameworks ready to compare the health and economic impacts of…
Concerns Around Budget Impact Thresholds: Not All Drugs Are The Same
A study published in Value in Health explores the potential impact of using budget thresholds as budget caps (e.g., cannot spend more than a set dollar amount) for individual drugs.
Comparison of Value Framework Assessments for Multiple Myeloma
In this NPC-funded study conducted by the Lewin Group, four existing value assessment frameworks were compared head to head to understand how each framework would approach the same condition,…
Improving Oncology Quality Measurement in Accountable Care: Filling Gaps with Cross-Cutting Measures
According to a study, gaps in the quality measures used by accountable care programs to assess cancer care may obscure problems in care delivery and lead to missed opportunities for improvement of…
Assessing Value: Promise and Pitfalls Conference Summary Report
At NPC's conference, Assessing Value: Promise and Pitfalls, top experts in their fields united to discuss value assessment as it impacts payers, patients, providers and pharmaceutical innovators.