Resources
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.
Filter by:
Topic
Topic
- 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
Resource Type
Resource Type
Display Only
Showing 32 Results
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.
Prevalence of Avoidable and Bias-Inflicting Methodological Pitfalls in Real-World Studies of Medication Safety and Effectiveness
This paper focuses on recognizing methodological flaws in RWE studies so that researchers can avoid these flaws by identifying them ahead of time – not just after a study is complete.
The Impact of COVID-19 on Real-World Health Data and Research
This white paper provides key health care stakeholders, including clinicians, researchers, payers and regulators, with a broad view of how the COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted real-world data (RWD…
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.
Improving Transparency to Build Trust in Real-World Secondary Data Studies for Hypothesis Testing—Why, What, and How Recommendations and a Roadmap from the Real-World Evidence Transparency Initiative
A position paper by the RWE Transparency Initiative describes a plan for improving the transparency of the research process and making registration of real-world evidence study methods easier and…
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…
Patient-Community Perspectives on Real-World Evidence: Enhancing Engagement, Understanding, and Trust
Researchers found that while most patient organizations were initially unaware of real-world evidence (RWE) and its actual or potential uses, they recognized the ability of RWE to provide relevant…
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.
Peer-reviewed Journal Editors' Views on Real-world Evidence
A study published in the International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care reveals that real-world evidence is considered valuable by the editors of peer-reviewed journals—if it meets…
Real-World Evidence: Useful in the Real World of United States Payer Decision-Making? How? When? And What Studies?
Research published in Value in Health on real-world evidence provides a deeper understanding of when and how managed care organizations use RWE in decision-making, and how to increase its use.
Information Wanted: Finding the Balance in Pharmaceutical Evidence Exchange With Payers and Providers
Payers and providers were surveyed to understand the type of health care economic information (HCEI) they desire and value in the current and future health care environment, as well as the potential…
Health Plan Use of Patient Data: From the Routine to the Transformational
As the abundance and variety of patient data elements and sources continue to grow, health plans seek opportunities to deepen insights from multiple sources of patient data to shape care delivery,…
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…
Is Real World Evidence Used in P&T Monographs and Therapeutic Class Reviews?
Payers infrequently used real-world evidence (RWE), or information on how treatments work in the real world, to guide their medication coverage and reimbursement decisions, according to research…
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.
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…