ArticleHealth economics review2025
Public perceptions of high-cost cancer drugs and the implications for reimbursement decisions.
Article in Health economics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReimbursing high-cost cancer drugs presents challenges in managing uncertainty, setting appropriate prices, and controlling pharmaceutical expenditures. We examined the perspectives of the South Korean public on high-cost cancer drugs and policy options to improve reimbursement for these treatments.
methodsWe conducted a self-rated, web-based survey from November to December 2023. We used a quota sampling method based on South Korean census data to recruit study participants. The questionnaire comprised four sections: socio-demographics, definitions of high-cost cancer drugs and reasons for their reimbursement, uncertainties associated with high-cost cancer drugs, and policy options to improve reimbursement for these treatments.
resultsOf the 11,974 invitations sent, 1,000 participants completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 8.35%. Three-quarters of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that high-cost cancer drugs should be reimbursed. More than 70% accepted the need for price negotiations, even if they lead to drug withdrawals or delays in reimbursement decisions. A similar proportion agreed that new policy options, such as dual pricing and additional funding, should be introduced with caution.
conclusionThe South Korean public perceives the reimbursement of high-cost cancer drugs as both a human rights measure and a government responsibility. However, they support reimbursement only when they are confident that the drug is safe, effective, and cost-effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.