References
- Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. Br. Med. 1313, 275–283 (1996).
- Badger K, Daly MJ, Heatley RV, Williams DRR. Clinical economics review: gastroenterology. Ali. Pharmcol. Ther 10, 55–60 (1996).
- Evans WK. Cost-effectiveness analysis in oncology. Praxis 89,492–495 (2000).
- ••Explains the key methodologic principlesof economic evaluation in brief.
- Bevan G, Hollinghurst S. Cost per quality- adjusted life year and disability-adjustedlife years: the need for a new paradigm. Expert. Rev Pharmacoeconomics Outcome Res. 3,469–477 (2003).
- The Global Burden of Disease: a Comprehensive Assessment of Mortality and Disability from Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors in 1990 and Projected to 2020. Murray CJ, Lopez AD (Eds). Harvard University Press, IL, USA (1996).
- •Contains the methodology for estimating disability-adjusted life years (DALY) that has been replicated in many other studies.
- Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Regional patterns of disability-free life expectancy and disability-adjusted life expectancy: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 349, 1347–1352 (1997).
- Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortality and disability by cause 1990-2020: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 349,1498–1504 (1997).
- Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Global mortality, disability, and the contribution of risk factors: Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet349, 1436–1442 (1997).
- Mathers CD, Vos ET, Stevenson CE. The Burden of Disease and Injury in Australia. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra, Australia (1999).
- DiWAK. Control Priorities in Developing Countries Jamison DT, Mosley WH (Eds). Oxford University Press for the World Bank, Oxford, UK; NY, USA (1993).
- Bobadilla JL, Cowley P, Musgrove P, Saxenian H. Design, content and financing of an essential national package of health services. Bull. WHO 72,653–662 (1994).
- American College of Rheumatology Subcommittee on Rheumatoid Arthritis Guidelines. Guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Arth. Rheum. 46, 328–346 (2002).
- •Contains up-to-date information on the pharmacologic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
- Kremer JM. Rational use of new and existing disease-modifying agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann. Intern. Med. 134,695–706 (2001).
- Osiri M, Shea B, Robinson V et al. Leflunomide for treating rheumatoid arthritis. In: The Cochrane Library Issue 1. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, UK (2004).
- •• Demonstrates a meta-analysis of leflunomide in the treatment of RA.
- Hewitson PJ, DeBrae S, McBride A, Milne R. Leflunomide and rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of effectiveness, safety and cost implications. j Clin. Pharm. Ther 25,295–302 (2000).
- Maetzel A, Strand V, Tugwell P, Wells G, Bombardier C. Economic comparison of leflunomide and methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an evaluation based on a 1-year randomised controlled trial. PharmacoEconomics 20,61–70 (2002).
- Maetzel A, Strand V, Tugwell P, Wells G, Bombardier C. Cost effectiveness of adding leflunomide to a 5-year strategy of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arth. Rheum. 47, 655–661 (2002).
- Choi HK, Seeger JD, Kuntz KM. A cost effectiveness analysis of treatment options for methotrexate-naive rheumatoid arthritis. J. RIzeumatd. 29,1156–1165 (2002).
- Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare, Department of Statistics and Information. National Patient Survey 1999. Health and Welfare Statistics Association, Tokyo, Japan. (in Japanese) (2001).
- National Institute of Population and Social Security Research. Population Projections for Japan, 2001–2050. Health and Welfare Statistics Association, Tokyo, Japan. (in Japanese) (2002).
- Suka M, Yoshida K. Evaluation of the burdens of rheumatic arthritis and osteoarthritis. (in Japanese) Ryumachi 42, 786–794 (2002).
- Suka M, Yoshida K. The national burdens of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis in Japan: projections to the year 2010 with future changes in severity distribution. Modern Rheumat. (2004) (In Press).
- •Demonstrates the national burden of RA in Japan projected to the year 2010 together with future changes in severity distribution.
- National Health Trends 1995. Health and Welfare Statistics Association, Tokyo, Japan. (in Japanese) (1995).
- Fukuda Y, Hasegawa T, Yatsuya H, Tabata K. The national burden of disease and DALY in Japan. (in Japanese). j Health Welfare Statistics 46,28–33 (1999).
- Diagnosis Manual and Treatment Guideline bared on EBM Ochi T, Yamamoto K, Taki J (Eds). Japan Rheumatism Foundation, Tokyo. (in Japanese) (2004).
- Dieppe P, Bartlett C, Davey P, Doyal L, Ebrahim S. Balancing benefits and harms: the example of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Br. Med. J. 329, 31–34 (2004).
- •Explains the pros and cons of high quality scientific evidence in terms of generalizability.
- Yazdani C, McLaughlin T, Cummins G, Doyle J. Comparison of rheumatoid arthritis care costs in patients starting therapy with leflunomide versus etanercept. Am. J Manag. Care 7\(Suppl. 13), S419—S426 (2001).
- Ollendorf DA, Peterson AN, Doyle J, Huse DM. Impact of Leflunomide versus biologic agents on the costs of care for rheumatoid arthritis in a managed care population. Am. J Manag. Care 8, S203—S213 (2002).
Website
- Symmons D, Mathers C, Pfleger B. The global burden of rheumatoid arthritis in the year 2000 www3.who.int/whosisimenu.cfm?path=evi dence,burden,burden_gbd2000docs (Accessed November 2004)