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
- Formulary/Benefit Design
- 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
- IRA Implementation
- Pandemic Response
- 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
Audience
Display Only
Showing 51 Results
Specialty drug use for autoimmune conditions varies by race and wage among employees with employer-sponsored health insurance
Published in the Journal of Managed Care and Specialty Pharmacy, this study found that low-income and non-white individuals participating in commercial health plans have lower usage of specialty…
The Myth of Average: Why Individual Patient Differences Matter
NPC's "The Myth of Average" explores how patients, health care providers, insurers, and other decision-makers can better consider individual patient differences when navigating the complexities of…
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…
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.
Little Consistency in Evidence Cited by Commercial Health Plans for Specialty Drug Coverage
Evidence cited by payers in coverage decisions for specialty medicines varies significantly, with health plans only citing the same study in 15% of health plan coverage policies for a given drug 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…
Evaluation of Person-level Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects in Published Multiperson N-of-1 Studies: Systematic Review and Reanalysis
To understand when and how individual treatment effects are examined, conducted and reported, this study evaluated existing multiperson N-of-1 studies, which can identify whether an intervention is…
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…
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…
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…
Got CER? Educating Pharmacists for Practice in the Future: New Tools for New Challenges
This study provides an early evaluation of the CER Collaborative's training program's impact on learners’ self-reported abilities to evaluate and incorporate comparative effectiveness research…
Data, Data Everywhere, But Access Remains a Big Issue for Researchers
This study captures the policy inconsistencies and hurdles that can hinder use of publicly funded federal and state datasets for researchers. These limitations can make it harder to conduct high…
Why Is Broader Access to Publicly Funded Data Important?
This infographic illustrates the policy inconsistencies and hurdles that can hinder use of publicly funded federal and state datasets for researchers.
2016 Comparative Effectiveness Research and the Environment for Health Care Decision-Making
NPC's sixth annual survey of stakeholder views on comparative effectiveness research (CER) and the environment for health care decision-making found that stakeholders continue to have a high…