↓ Skip to main content

Reimbursement of orphan drugs in Belgium: what (else) matters?

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reimbursement of orphan drugs in Belgium: what (else) matters?
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13023-014-0139-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eline Picavet, David Cassiman, Steven Simoens

Abstract

BackgroundMost orphan drugs do not meet traditional standards of cost-effectiveness. Yet, most orphan drugs are reimbursed, which implies that other factors are taken into account at the time of reimbursement. To increase accountability of decision-makers, there is a need for more transparency in the factors that play a role in reimbursement decisions of orphan drugs. Therefore, the aim of this study is to use a combination of qualitative research methods to examine which official and non-official factors influence reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in Belgium.MethodsSix semi-structured interviews with past or present members of the Drug Reimbursement Committee (DRC) were performed with a view to obtaining an overview of the potential factors influencing reimbursement. Additionally, these presence of these factors was assessed in the reimbursement dossiers of all orphan drugs (n¿=¿64) for which an application for reimbursement was submitted to the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance in Belgium between January 2002 and July 2013.ResultsDifferent official (i.e. therapeutic value, budget impact, price and impact in clinical practice) and non-official factors (i.e. pricing and reimbursement in other countries, interference by patient organisations and experts, arguments related to quality of branded drug versus compounding, media attention, innovative character, economic importance, ethical arguments and the political climate) may have influenced past reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs in Belgium.DiscussionThe identification of factors influencing orphan drug reimbursement is a crucial step in the development of a transparent and consistent framework which will guide future decision-making for reimbursement of orphan drugs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 23%
Researcher 16 15%
Other 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 21%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 21 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,320,620
of 21,326,395 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#564
of 2,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,343
of 216,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,326,395 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 216,687 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them