VALUE
Determining the comparative value of a new health technology is vital in securing market access. The value is drawn following a standardized rigorous evidence-based approach to provide reliable and reproducible results:
First, a systematic review of the literature is conducted to identify and appraise all relevant scientific evidence (clinical trials) on the specific research question. The main purpose of the review is to summarize what is already known about the effectiveness and risks of all health technologies being used for a particular medical indication.
Second, the good quality evidence is combined together (synthesized quantitatively) to provide a comprehensible picture on the effectiveness and risks of all competing health technologies under evaluation. This should help identify important unmet medical needs fulfilled by your product.
Our expertise on the analytical techniques employed for evidence synthesis includes not only the traditional meta-analysis (where all included clinical studies compare the same two interventions), but also Mixed Treatment Comparisons, a novel analytical technique that allows the combination of more than just two different interventions simultaneously, thereby synthesizing a greater share of the available evidence than traditional meta-analysis.
What is more, when the proposed health technology has not yet been compared directly (head-to-head study) to another specific technology and/or the available direct evidence is limited or insufficient to draw conclusions on relative efficacy Mixed Treatment Comparisons can be used to overcome these limitations.