Sukses Main Mahjong Ways Best808 Pahami Scatter dan Kombinasinya Mahjong Ways Best808 Simbol Scatter Meningkatkan Peluang Menang Kesalahan Umum Pemain Mahjong Ways di Best808 Auto Jackpot Strategi Terbaik Fitur Scatter Mahjong Ways Best808 Mahjong Ways Best808 Panduan Scatter Wild Hasil Maksimal Pola Mahjong Ways Best808 Gacor Scatter Menang Bongkar Misteri Mahjong Ways Best808 Kunci Kemenanganmu Mau Cuan Maksimal di Mahjong Ways Best808 Trik Menggunakan Scatter Agar Lebih Untung Main Mahjong Ways di Best808 Kenali Pola Scatter Free Spin Gandakan Kemenanganmu Rahasia Scatter Mahjong Ways Best808 Strategi Jitu Menang Jackpot Besar Misteri Scatter Mahjong Ways Tol777 Kunci Jackpot Besar Bongkar Rahasia Mahjong Ways Tol777 Fitur Scatter Pola Menang Mahjong Ways Tol777 Simbol Scatter Kemenangan Besar Main Mahjong Ways di Tol777 Cara Memanfaatkan Scatter Strategi Mahjong Ways Tol777 Rahasia Scatter Trik Menang Jackpot Analisis Pola Permainan Mahjong Ways Keunggulan Mahjong Ways Tol777 vs Tradisional Kombinasi Simbol Tertinggi Mahjong Ways Langkah Meningkatkan Keahlian Mahjong Ways Mahjong Ways Tol777 Berbeda dari Permainan Mengapa Mahjong Ways Tol777 Diminati Dunia Optimalkan Putaran Mahjong Ways Tol777 Sejarah Mahjong Ways Tol777 dan Keunikan Simbol Mahjong Ways Tol777 dan Pemanfaatannya Strategi Lanjutan Mahjong Ways Tol777 Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Live RTP Dan Kasino Online Cara Cepat Kuasai Mahjong Ways Tol777 Mengapa Mahjong Ways Tol777 Populer Mitos & Fakta Mahjong Ways Tol777 Strategi Pemula vs Pro Mahjong Ways Teknik Profesional Mahjong Ways Tol777 Mahjong Ways Tol777: Keberuntungan atau Skill? Mahjong Ways Tol777: Tradisi dan Inovasi Panduan Mahjong Ways Tol777 untuk Pemula Rahasia Menang Mahjong Ways Tol777 Tips Efektif Main Mahjong Ways Tol777 Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online Kasino Online

Comparative Effectiveness Reviews: Quantitative Analysis of Research and Development Investment Effects

A based free-market think tank, examines an expanded quasi-federal comparative effectiveness review (CER) process and the negative effects on private-sector investment in research and development of new and improved medical technologies.

Download the PDF

San Francisco (July 15, 2011) — A new research study released by the Pacific Research Institute (PRI), a California-based free-market think tank, examines an expanded quasi-federal comparative effectiveness review (CER) process and the negative effects on private-sector investment in research and development of new and improved medical technologies. Under conservative assumptions, R&D investment in pharmaceuticals, medical devices and equipment would be reduced by about $10 billion per year over the period from 2014 through 2025. “Comparative Effectiveness Reviews: Quantitative Analysis of Research and Development Investment Effects” was authored by PRI senior policy fellow Benjamin Zycher, Ph.D.

Comparative Effectiveness Review (CER) is defined by the Congressional Budget Office as “a rigorous evaluation of the impact of different options that are available for treating a given medical condition for a particular set of patients.” Because policymakers have powerful incentives to restrain the growth of health care expenditures, an expanded federal role in CER, whether direct or indirect, will induce responses from the private sector as a result of expectations of how CER findings will be used by policymakers. For firms investing in and developing medical technologies, these expectations include an increased need for private clinical testing, increased pricing pressures, increased risk of non-approval or limited approval for federally-financed programs, a shortening of the patent period and delays in expected sales revenues.

Using data from the National Science Foundation and other sources, the report concludes that under conservative assumptions, R&D investment in new and improved pharmaceuticals and medical devices and equipment would be reduced by about 10-12 percent. This reduction in the flow of new and improved technology would impose an expected loss of about 5 million life-years annually, with a conservative economic value of $500 billion – an amount substantially greater than the entire U.S. market for pharmaceuticals, devices and equipment.

The effects of reduced investment in R&D would not apply uniformly to the U.S. population; instead, it would be concentrated upon particular population subgroups the identity of which depends upon how the adverse R&D effects are implemented over time. This reduced investment in medical R&D would be likely to affect technologies serving smaller populations, riskier treatments and drugs expected to prove relatively less profitable.

Dr. Zycher concludes, “These findings suggest that an expanded CER process at the federal level may be very unwise in a policy context, and that a renewed emphasis upon a “bottoms-up” approach of experimentation by many millions of practitioners and patients would be a more fruitful vehicle for the acquisition of information about the comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical approaches.”

Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.

Subscribe to our newsletter:

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Scroll to Top