[Indirect comparisons in drug assessment reports on the GENESIS group (SEFH) webpage].

Autor:	Ortega Eslava A; Servicio de Farmacia, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, España. aortega@unav.es, Fraga Fuentes MD, Puigventós Latorre F, Santos-Ramos B, Clopés Estela A, Vilanova Boltó M
Jazyk:	Spanish; Castilian
Zdroj:	Farmacia hospitalaria : organo oficial de expresion cientifica de la Sociedad Espanola de Farmacia Hospitalaria [Farm Hosp] 2012 Jul-Aug; Vol. 36 (4), pp. 176-9. Date of Electronic Publication: 2012 Mar 21.
DOI:	10.1016/j.farma.2011.11.005
Abstrakt:	Objective: Quantify use of indirect comparisons (IC) in drug evaluation reports published on the GENESIS Group web page for new drug assessment, standardisation, and drug selection research. Method: Retrospective study of drug reports written between 2008 and 2009. Data Collected: presence of an active comparator and details from any direct and indirect comparative studies included. Results: An active comparator was present in 95% of the 337 analysed reports; 50% included a direct comparative study vs comparator. In 114 reports (34%), an IC was used; 69% of the ICs were made by the report author. Most ICs were narrative and none were adjusted. An IC could have been made in an additional 16% of the cases and possibly in 24% more. Conclusions: Most evaluated drugs have an active comparator but studies comparing them directly are not as common. ICs could be included in more reports along with quality control criteria. (Copyright © 2011 SEFH. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu