Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Filtros aplicados
Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Aten. prim. (Barc., Ed. impr.) ; 49(6): 335-342, jun.-jul. 2017. tab, graf
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-163874

RESUMO

OBJETIVO: Examinar la relación entre la fuente de financiación de los análisis coste-efectividad de intervenciones sanitarias publicados en España y las conclusiones de los estudios. DISEÑO: Estudio descriptivo transversal. Emplazamiento: Bases de datos de literatura científica (hasta diciembre de 2014). Participantes (unidad de análisis): Cohorte de análisis coste-efectividad de intervenciones sanitarias publicados en España entre 1989-2014 (n = 223) que presentaran como medida de resultado los años de vida ajustados por calidad (AVAC). Mediciones principales: Se establecieron relaciones entre las conclusiones cualitativas de los estudios y el tipo de fuente de financiación utilizando la prueba exacta de Fisher en tablas de contingencia. Se exploraron las distribuciones de las estimaciones de las razones coste-efectividad incremental por fuente de financiación en relación a umbrales hipotéticos de disposición a pagar entre 30.000-50.000 Euros por AVAC. RESULTADOS: Un total de 136 (61,0%) estudios fueron financiados por la industria. Los estudios financiados por la industria eran menos propensos a presentar conclusiones desfavorables o neutrales que los estudios no financiados por la industria (2,2% frente al 23,0%; p < 0,0001), fundamentalmente en los estudios que evaluaban fármacos (0,9% frente al 21,4%; p < 0,0001). Las razones coste-efectividad incremental en los estudios financiados por la industria eran más propensas a situarse por debajo de los umbrales hipotéticos de disposición a pagar de 30.000€ (73,8% frente al 56,3%; p < 0,0001) y 50.000€ (89,4% frente al 68,2%; p < 0,0001) por AVAC. CONCLUSIONES: El presente estudio revela un potencial sesgo de patrocinio en los análisis coste-efectividad. Los estudios financiados por la industria podrían estar favoreciendo el perfil de eficiencia de sus productos


OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the funding source of cost-effectiveness analyses of healthcare interventions published in Spain and study conclusions. DESIGN: Descriptive cross-sectional study. LOCATION: Scientific literature databases (until December 2014). Participants (analysis units): Cohort of cost-effectiveness analysis of healthcare interventions published in Spain between 1989-2014 (n = 223) presenting quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the outcome measure. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The relationship between qualitative conclusions of the studies and the type of funding source were established using Fisher's exact test in contingency tables. Distributions of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios by source of funding in relation to hypothetical willingness to pay thresholds between Euros 30,000-Euros 50,000 per QALY were explored. RESULTS: A total of 136 (61.0%) studies were funded by industry. The industry-funded studies were less likely to report unfavorable or neutral conclusions than studies non-funded by industry (2.2% vs. 23.0%; P <.0001), largely driven by studies evaluating drugs (0.9% vs. 21.4%; P <.0001). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in studies funded by industry were more likely to be below the hypothetical willingness to pay threshold of €30,000 (73.8% vs. 56.3%; P <.0001) and €50,000 (89.4% vs. 68.2%; P <.0001) per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a potential sponsorship bias in cost-effectiveness analyses of healthcare interventions. Studies funded by industry could be favoring the efficiency profile of their products


Assuntos
Humanos , Avaliação de Eficácia-Efetividade de Intervenções , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Viés , Assistência à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Demografia , Tecnologia Biomédica/tendências , Sistemas de Financiamento da Pesquisa
3.
Allergol. immunopatol ; 37(3): 146-154, mayo-jun. 2009. tab
Artigo em Inglês | IBECS | ID: ibc-60389

RESUMO

This is a guide for grant application for researchers seeking research grants in the field of allergy and related diseases for the first time. It outlines how to organize proposals and the potential issues to be considered in order to fulfil the criteria of the funding bodies and thus improve chances of obtaining the desired funding when applying for a research grant. We will use this paper as an example of a grant proposal to be presented to the FIS “Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria” (Health Research Fund) of Spain. The general framework can be used for a research proposal to any funding agency. The main research designs are reviewed. Other topics such as hypothesis, objectives, methodology, ethics and legal issues, and budget are presented (AU)


No disponible


Assuntos
Humanos , Hipersensibilidade , Projetos de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto/tendências , Sistemas de Financiamento da Pesquisa , Projetos de Pesquisa/tendências
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA