QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]
Author:
Keyword(s):
Year:  Vol:  Page: 

   

 

Health Affairs, 24, no. 1 (2005): 243-254
doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.243
© 2005 by Project HOPE
 
New Online
 * How Would Obama, McCain Cover The Uninsured?
 * Debating Cost Of Uninsured
 * Try Medicare-For-All
 * HA Blog Top 10
This Article
* Figures Only
* Full Text (HTML)
* Reprint (PDF)
* Submit a response to this article
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me when eLetters are posted
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* E-mail this article to a friend
* Similar articles in this journal
* Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
* Similar articles in PubMed
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Personal Archive
* Download to Citation Manager
*Reprints & Permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via HighWire
* Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (12)
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Neumann, P. J.
* Articles by Gazelle, G. S.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* PubMed Citation
* Articles by Neumann, P. J.
* Articles by Gazelle, G. S.
Related Collections
* Medicare
* Quality Of Care

DataWatch

Medicare’s National Coverage Decisions, 1999–2003: Quality Of Evidence And Review Times

Peter J. Neumann, Nomita Divi, Molly T. Beinfeld, Bat-Sheva Levine, Patricia Seliger Keenan, Elkan F. Halpern and G. Scott Gazelle

In 1998 Medicare amended its procedures for making national coverage decisions for new technologies in an attempt to make the process more transparent and evidence based. We examined the quality of evidence for sixty-nine technologies reviewed by Medicare since then. Determinations by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have generally been consistent with the strength of evidence. Good clinical evidence from rigorous studies is usually lacking for the technologies Medicare considers, although in most cases the CMS covers with conditions if there is at least fair evidence that benefits outweigh harms. Decisions referred to the external Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee (MCAC) have averaged eight months longer than non-MCAC decisions.


Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
W. Hollingworth and J. G. Jarvik
Technology Assessment in Radiology: Putting the Evidence in Evidence-based Radiology
Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 31 - 38.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Health Aff (Millwood)Home page
P. J. Neumann
Challenges Ahead For Federal Technology Assessment
Health Aff., March 1, 2007; 26(2): w150 - w152.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Health Aff (Millwood)Home page
T. Carino, R. D. Williams II, A. M. Colbert, and P. Bridger
Medicare's Coverage Of Colorectal Cancer Drugs: A Case Study In Evidence Development And Policy
Health Aff., September 1, 2006; 25(5): 1231 - 1239.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
P. J. Neumann, A. B. Rosen, and M. C. Weinstein
Medicare and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
N. Engl. J. Med., October 6, 2005; 353(14): 1516 - 1522.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Home | Current Issue | Archives | Topic Collections | Search | Blog | Subscribe | Contact Us | Help

© 2001-2005 Project HOPE–The People-to-People Organization
Terms and Policies