Country/Region: France
PE Guidelines

French Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Technologies (September 2004) (French Version 2003)
PDF in English; PDF in French

PE Guidelines Source:
Additional Information:


Last Webpage Update:

PE Guidelines Key Features:

Key Features:  
Title and year of the document
French Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Technologies (September 2004) (French Version 2003) 
Affiliation of authors
The members of the Collège des Économistes de la Santé (the French Health Economists Association) 
Purpose of the document
Provide methodological and reporting guidelines for PE evaluations. 
Standard reporting format included
Yes 
Disclosure
Yes 
Target audience of funding/ author's interests
Decision makers, researchers, pharmaceutical companies 
Perspective
Economic evaluation studies of health care programmes must adopt the widest possible perspective in order to include all the relevant outcomes of each programme studied. The choice of the range of observation must be justified. 
Indication
Approved indication 
Target population
The target population of the evaluation must be clearly described. 
Subgroup analysis
Yes 
Choice of comparator
The therapeutic strategies to be used as comparators will be chosen among those most frequently used (including non-treatment) or newer strategies which may legitimately be deemed likely to become reference strategies in the very near future. 
Time horizon
Long enough that all outcomes, both positive and negative, of the treatments used and evaluated be included in the study. 
Assumptions required
Yes 
Preferred analytical technique
Any one of CMA, CEA, CUA, CBA, and CCA. The choice must be justified. 
Costs to be included
Depends on the aim of the study. All costs that are relevant must be distinguished and presented in detail. Report indirect costs separately. 
Source of costs
The identification, measurement and valuation of costs should be consistent with the perspective of the Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information (PMSI) [the medical information system which is the French DRG program]. 
Modeling
Yes, requires details. 
Systematic review of evidences
Yes 
Preference for effectiveness over efficacy
Effectiveness is to be preferred to efficacy. If, however, efficacy is the sole indicator available, every effort should be made to convert this into effectiveness by means of appropriate adjustments. 
Preferred outcome measure
Final outcomes preferred. 
Preferred method to derive utility
The methods most commonly used to identify preferences are the SG, TTO, and VAS methods. These methods allow for the expression of individual preferences within a strict framework. 
Equity issues stated
Yes 
Discounting costs
For the purposes of international comparisons the rates used should be 0%, 3% and 5%. 
Discounting outcomes
For the purposes of international comparisons the rates used should be 0%, 3% and 5%. 
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range
Maintain uncertain variables. 
Sensitivity analysis-methods
A distinction is made between univariate and multivariate analysis, and also between first order and second order analysis. 
Presenting results
The results of an economic evaluation study should be presented in such a way as to allow peer examination and review. 
Incremental analysis
Yes 
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio)
Cost-effectiveness (or cost-utility ratios) must be expressed in incremental form so that they may be used as a criterion to assist in decision-making. 
Portability of results (Generalizability)
When the economic evaluation study relies on international data or national data for a country other than France, the authors should demonstrate that these data may be transferred with sufficient plausibility to the French context. 
Financial impact analysis
Yes 
Mandatory or recommended or voluntary
Recommended 

Country Selection Page | PE Guidelines Index Page