, Volume 28, Issue 5, pp 347–349 | Cite as

Single Technology Appraisal at the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

A Source of Evidence and Analysis for Decision Making Internationally



Mark Sculpher is part of an Evidence Review Group based at the University of York, which receives funding from the UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.


  1. 1.
    House of Commons Health Committee. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Volume I: report, together with formal minutes. London: The Stationery Office Limited, 2007Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barham L. Single technology appraisals by NICE: are they delivering faster guidance to the NHS? Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26 (12): 1037–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaltenthaler E, Tappenden P, Booth A, et al. Comparing methods for full versus single technology appraisal: a case study of docetaxel and paclitaxel for early breast cancer. Health Policy 2008; 87: 389–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rodgers M, Griffin S, Paulden M, et al. Alitretinoin for severe chronic hand eczema: a NICE single technology appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics 2010: 28 (5): 351–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Towse A, Garrison Jr LP. Cant get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help? Toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 93–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MacLeod S, Mitton C. We know accurately only when we know little. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 105–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Menon D, McCabe CJ, Stafinski T, et al. Principles of design of access with evidence development approaches: a consensus statement from the Banff Summitt. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 109–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stafinski T, McCabe CJ, Menon D. Funding the unfundable: mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 113–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McCabe CJ, Stafinski T, Edlin R, et al. Access with evidence development schemes: a framework for description and evaluation. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 143–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mohr PE, Tunis SR. Access with evidence development: the US experience. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 153–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Briggs A, Ritchie K, Fenwick E, et al. Access with evidence development in the UK: past experience, current initiatives and future potential. Pharmacoeconomics 2010; 28 (2): 163–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bagust A, Greenhalgh J, Boland A, et al. Cetuximab for recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a NICE single technology appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. In pressGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE, 2008Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barbieri M, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ. Who does the numbers? The role of third-party technology assessments to inform health systems’ decision-making about the funding of health technologies. Value Health 2009; 12: 193–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Health EconomicsUniversity of YorkHeslington, YorkUK

Personalised recommendations