[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
October 18, 2000

Problems in Pharmacoeconomic Analyses—Reply

Author Affiliations

Stephen J.LurieMD, PhD, Senior EditorIndividualAuthorPhil B.FontanarosaMD, Executive Deputy EditorIndividualAuthor

JAMA. 2000;284(15):1922-1924. doi:10.1001/jama.284.15.1921

In Reply: Mr Stafford believes that Dr Hill and colleagues'1 connections to, and relationships with, the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme brings their subsequent analysis into question. He states that the authors failed to reveal their involvement in these official government-sponsored analyses. In fact, a footnote on the first page of their article reveals that 1 of the authors was from the Pharmaceutical Evaluation Section, Pharmaceutical Benefits Branch, Department of Health and Aged Care. Furthermore, it is clearly stated that "The database of submissions and the committee reports were scrutinized by 2 of [the] authors (S.R.H. and D.A.H.)." As was made clear in another footnote, the study received financial support from the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. We believe that this was full disclosure. We point out that only those involved in the analyses could be in a position to conduct such an overview because the individual analyses, under the secrecy provisions of the Australian National Health Act, are kept confidential.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview