ICER Value Framework 2020 Update - Aggregation of Benefits and Contextual Considerations
A method used to combine different health benefits and real-world factors—like how serious a disease is or whether there are other treatments—when deciding if a new medical treatment offers good value. It helps decision-makers weigh both health effects and broader social considerations in a structured way.
At a glance
Use when
Conducting value-based assessment of health technologies where contextual factors are important; informing pricing and reimbursement decisions with a broad value perspective.
Avoid when
A strictly quantitative or fully automated decision rule is required; when a formal mathematical MCDA model is needed; in settings where contextual considerations are not part of appraisal mandates.
Inputs
Net health benefit estimates, evidence on additional benefits/disadvantages, contextual factors (e.g., severity, unmet need, equity, innovation), expert panel input.
Outputs
Structured value judgments, summary scores or rankings reflecting aggregated benefits and contextual considerations, value-based pricing recommendations.
How it works
A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA)-inspired deliberative method developed by ICER that aggregates net health benefit, additional benefits/disadvantages, and contextual considerations (e.g., severity of illness, unmet need, equity) through expert panel voting. Used to inform value-based pricing and coverage recommendations, it makes non-monetary value judgments explicit in appraisal decisions without converting them into monetary terms.
- HTA domains
- Clinical Effectiveness, Costs & Economic Evaluation, Patient and Social Aspects
- Categories
- Appraisal
- Assumptions
- Contextual factors can be meaningfully weighed alongside clinical and economic evidence; expert deliberation can capture societal values; transparency in weighting improves legitimacy.
- Strengths
- Makes value judgments explicit and systematic; incorporates equity and unmet need; enhances transparency in decision-making; uses structured expert elicitation.
- Limitations
- Not all criteria are quantified; results depend on panel composition and process; limited generalizability across health systems; lacks formal mathematical aggregation model.
- Also known as
- ICER Value Framework 2020, ICER MCDA-style Aggregation Method
Questions this answers
- › How should non-health benefits and contextual factors be incorporated into value assessments?
- › What is the overall net benefit of a therapy considering both clinical and contextual factors?
- › How do severity of illness and lack of alternatives influence perceived value?
- › How can equity considerations be formally integrated into HTA?
- › How do stakeholders weigh different domains of benefit in deliberative processes?
- › What structured approach supports transparent value judgments in health technology assessment?
References & sources
Similar by meaning
Beta record. Based on the original catalogue summary; primary-source enrichment pending.