, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 93–100 | Cite as

Is there a Need for an Independent Centre for Pharmacoeconomics in the UK?

  • Tom Walley
  • Rhiannon T. Edwards
Leading Article UK Centre for Pharmaeconomics


Economic Evaluation Pharmaceutical Industry National Health Service Pharmacoeconomic Study Health Econ 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industries (ABPI).Limiting medicines - reducing choice. ABPI Briefing. ABPI. London.November 1992Google Scholar
  2. Bateman DN. The selected list. British Medical Journal 306: 1141–1142,1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bligh J, Walley T. The UK indicative prescribinging scheme. Pharmaco Economics 2: 137–152, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradlow J, Coulter A. Effect of fundholding and indicative prescribing scheme on general practitioners’ prescribing costs. British Medical Journal 307: 1186–1189, 1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Charlton B, Management of science. Lancet 342: 99–100, 1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davey P. Malek M. Dodd T. Pharmaro economics: the truth.Lancet 341;1097–1098,1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Denby A. Wells N, Interpreting economic evaluations of medicines: a new role for the pharmacist? Pharmaco Economics 2: 95–98, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Department of Health. Improving prescribing. Sections 1.2 and 2.21,Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. London. 1990Google Scholar
  9. Department of Health. Working for patients. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. London, 1993Google Scholar
  10. Detsky AS. Guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products: a draft document for Ontario and Canada. Pharmaco Economics 3: 354–361, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drummond M. The role of economic evaluation in the pricing of modern pharmaceutical products: I-IV. pp. 7-8, 18-19,32-33, 38-42, Pharmaceutical Times. December 19811-March 1990Google Scholar
  12. Drummond M. Australian guidelines for cost effectiveness studies of pharmaceuticals - the thin end of the boomerang? Centre for Health Economics. University of York Discussion Paper no. 88,1991Google Scholar
  13. Drummond MF. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: science or marketing? Pharmaco Economics 1: 8–13, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Drummond M, Rutten M. Brenna A. Pinto CG, Horisberger B. et al. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: a European perspective.Pharmaco Economics 4: 113–186, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. EditoriaL Economics for medical students, Lancet 2: 200. 1989Google Scholar
  16. Editoria L Farewell to promoting good-buys? Lancet 338: 416–417, 1991Google Scholar
  17. Editorial. First UK ‘blacklist’ candidates notified. Scrip 28. May (1824):3,1993Google Scholar
  18. Editorial. UK DoH moves on economic analysis. Scrip, 12 March (1802):2,1993Google Scholar
  19. Editorial, UK DoH exploring cost benefit. Scrip. 25 May (1823): 2.1993Google Scholar
  20. EditoriaL Research and effective health care. Lancet 342: 64–65.1993Google Scholar
  21. Glennester H. General Practice fundholding in the UK: is it working Pharmaco Economics 2: 10–13, 1992Google Scholar
  22. Henry D. Economic analysis as an aid to subsidisation decisions: the development of Australian guidelines for pharmaceuticals. Pharmaco Economics 1: 54–67, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herxheimer A. Randomised controlled trials, the Cochrane collaboration. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London 271: 180, 1993Google Scholar
  24. Hillman AL. Eisenberg JM, Pauly MV, Bloom BS. Glick H, et al. Avoiding bias in the conduct and reporting of cost-effectiveness research sponsored by pharmaceutical Companies. New England Journal of Medicine 324; 1362–1365, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Horton R.Pharmacoeconomical with the truth. Lancet 341: 752, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Horton R. Medicines Information Bill. Lancet 341: 1208–1209. 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Klein R. The role of health economics. British Medical Journal 299:275–276,1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maxwell M, Heaney D. Howie J. Noble S. General practice fund. holding: observations on prescribing patterns and costs using the defined daily dose method. British Medical Journal 307: 1190–1194,1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Maynard A. Medicines in 1M twenty first century: who decides? An economist’s perspective. Presesnted at the British Pharmaceutical Conference. 12th September 1991Google Scholar
  30. McGuire A. A Centre for pharmacoenomics? Presented at Economic evaluation of medicines: current; issues and future needs. National Health and Lung Institute, London, 15-16 March. 1993 Office of Health Economics. Compendium of health statistics. OHE. London. 1992Google Scholar
  31. Reilly A, Taylor R. Webster J. General practitioners’ attitudes towards the limited list. Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 36: 151–152, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Ryan M, Yule B. Bond C. Taylor RJ. Scottish general practitioners’ attitudes and knowledge in respect of prescribing. British Medical Journal 300: 1316–1318. 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith R. Where is the wisdom? The poverty of medical evidence. British Medical Journal 303: 798–799. 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walley T, Edwards RT. Health economics in primary care in the UK: containment of drug costs. Pharmaco Economics 3: 100–106, 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Well. N. Regulation of The pharmaceutical industry; and now pharmaeconomic research? Pharma Economics 2: 435–439, 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zammit-Lucia J. The use of extemal enpertise: the issues surrounding commisioned research. Presented at Economic evaluation of medicines: current issues and future needs. National Heart and Lung Institute, London, 15-16 March, 1993Google Scholar

Copyright information

© adis International Limited 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tom Walley
    • 1
  • Rhiannon T. Edwards
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Pharmacology and TherapeuticsUniversity of LiverpoolEngland
  2. 2.Department of Public HealthUniversity of LiverpoolEngland

Personalised recommendations