ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025
Coverage with evidence development for medicines with insufficient evidence of clinical benefit: experience from the Netherlands.
Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSince 2019 the Dutch National Healthcare Institute has operated a coverage with evidence development (CED) program for specific products with insufficient evidence of their clinical benefit: orphan medicinal products (OMPs), medicines with conditional marketing authorization (CMA), and medicines with marketing authorization under exceptional circumstances (AEC). The objective of this study is to give an overview of this program and reflect on learnings, challenges, and opportunities.
methodsThis study is a narrative policy review of the Dutch CED program and describes the different phases and stakeholder involvement. Additionally, an overview of the medicines included in the CED program is presented and put in an international perspective.
resultsThe CED program consists of four phases: candidate prescreening, research protocol drafting, signing of process agreement and financial agreement, and controlled access. Stakeholders are involved intensively throughout the process. Since 2019, six medicines have entered the program. The program is used to fill different evidence gaps for various types of medicines and indications. In other countries, these medicines are often included in restricted reimbursement programs.
conclusionsThe CED program is gathering clinical effectiveness data while providing patient access to OMPs, CMA, and AEC products. Important facilitating factors for the program were identified, including the involvement of all stakeholders, the only-in-research approach of data gathering, and the case-by-case evidence generation requirements and duration. Continuous evaluation is needed as the program does not yet include the expected number of medicines, and no conclusion can be drawn so far on the usefulness of the data collection.
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.