Advance Value Framework
The Advance Value Framework is a structured way to assess the value of new medicines using multiple factors that matter to decision-makers. It helps payers, clinicians, and patients understand how a medicine performs across areas like disease burden, benefits, safety, innovation, and social impact. It uses expert input and a step-by-step method to score and compare treatments in a fair and transparent way.
At a glance
Use when
Evaluating new medicines for HTA, reimbursement, or coverage decisions; when a broader assessment beyond cost-effectiveness is needed; in settings requiring transparent and multi-stakeholder value assessment
Avoid when
When only cost-effectiveness is required; when data are insufficient across multiple criteria; when decision-makers reject multi-criteria approaches or prefer simpler heuristics
Inputs
Clinical evidence, safety data, epidemiological data, innovation assessments, socioeconomic impact indicators, expert preferences for weighting criteria
Outputs
Comprehensive value score for a medicine, structured breakdown of performance across criteria and domains, transparent basis for comparative assessment
How it works
The Advance Value Framework is a Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) method based on Multi Attribute Value Theory (MAVT). It follows a five-stage, top-down 'value-focused thinking' approach involving literature reviews and expert consultations to construct a generic value tree with three hierarchical levels: criteria clusters, criteria, and sub-criteria. The framework organizes value assessment into five domains: burden of disease, therapeutic impact, safety profile, innovation level, and socioeconomic impact. MAVT techniques are used to operationalize the model, including scoring treatment alternatives, eliciting criterion weights, and aggregating weighted scores to produce an overall value score. The framework supports transparent, structured, and adaptable value assessment for HTA and reimbursement decisions.
- HTA domains
- Clinical Effectiveness, Costs & Economic Evaluation, Patient and Social Aspects, Aspects Beyond HTA
- Categories
- Appraisal
- Assumptions
- Decision-makers have definable and measurable value preferences; criteria are independent or appropriately adjusted for correlation; value can be meaningfully quantified and aggregated using additive MAVT models
- Strengths
- Provides a structured, transparent, and comprehensive assessment of medicine value; aligns with decision theory; flexible and adaptable to different contexts; incorporates diverse domains including innovation and socioeconomic impact; supports stakeholder involvement through preference elicitation
- Limitations
- Relies on availability and quality of data for all criteria; weighting process may introduce subjectivity; assumes compensatory trade-offs between criteria; implementation requires expertise in MCDA methods
- Also known as
- Advance Value Tree, AVF
Questions this answers
- › What is the overall value of a new medicine across multiple relevant dimensions?
- › How does a medicine perform in terms of disease burden reduction and therapeutic benefit?
- › What is the safety profile of the treatment relative to alternatives?
- › How innovative is the medicine compared to existing options?
- › What are the broader socioeconomic impacts of adopting the medicine?
- › How can value be measured in a transparent and structured way for HTA decisions?
References & sources
Similar by meaning
Beta record. Generated from the primary source via AI extraction and independent audit, pending final human review.