“When everything is connected to everything else,for better or for worse, everything matters.” Bruce Mau
From natural ranking order to network relationships, data visualization has always been present even in the early ages of humanity. However, that wish to classify and find an order is actually not relevant anymore in today’s world. Linear relationships cannot show what networks can communicate and promote: those notions of decentralization, interconnectedness and interdependence.
It is fascinating to see that this web architecture is widespread to several fields like knowledge, history, social ties between people, online social collaboration, terrorism, life sciences, species, ecosystems…
“This metaphor of the network, is really already adopting various shapes and forms, and it’s almost becoming a growing visual taxonomy. It’s almost becoming the syntax of a new language. And this is one aspect that truly fascinates me. And these are actually 15 different typologies I’ve been collecting over time, and it really shows the immense visual diversity of this new metaphor,” highlighted Manuel Lima.
Having an understanding of complex systems, with the support of IT technology, is crucial today as any decision could have unexpected effets.
Simulation allows us to think about what the future might be. It also helps us to understand the current reality and day-to-day life of people, in this article, elderly ones.
Drafting global strategies for an improved care of that fragile population as one of the results of those simulations is crucial in today’s world. Actually, we need to plan for their evolution and needs as they will soon represent the majority of the society.
Serendipity or “making discoveries, by accidents and sagacity, of things which we were not in quest of” is again one of the best source for innovation in the drug industry.
This is the story of a sleep disorder pill (modafinil or Provigil) that has been deemed the first pure cognitive enhancer.
It may be helpful for the policy discussion to think of a drug’s value as the clinical performance and patient outcomes, while the price reflects both the value and the growing uncertainty around in-market risks of market consolidation and restricted access, branded therapeutic competition, mandatory discounts, and restrictive coverage policy.
As competition heats up, each sector and each entity strives to reduce input costs and maintain or improve prices — and consolidation can be an important tool to accomplish these goals. Specific to biopharma, consolidation strengthens payers’ and providers’ ability to press for drug discounts that are contractual, proprietary, and confidential.
Net lifetime revenues of new biopharma therapies declined from profitability in the late 1990s to slightly negative profitability by the end of the first decade of 21st century.
In addition to cross-sector market competition through payer and provider consolidation, there is growing intra-sectorial competition among generics, biosimilars, and branded therapeutic alternatives.
We should not underestimate the potential effect of mandatory price discounts on drug launch prices.
In-market risks for biopharma are very significant today. Because of rapid changes in the market environment, revenue expectations established when the decision is made to proceed with product development can be very different than actual revenue several years later when a product is launched.
This New York Times article takes a step back on childhood immunizations and gives us an overview of the diseases and complications that could be avoided with vaccines.
As most of us already know, vaccines are probably one of the most important health and lifesaving advances of the last century. However, misinformation and scaremongering is damaging the perception and the adoption of that innovation.
When too many people opt out of immunizing, outbreaks of preventable diseases happen, with sometimes deadly consequences for some.
Childhood diseases could lead to serious complications doubled by debilitating infections.
It’s a shame not to use all the available technology to protect us and our loved ones from potentially deadly diseases. It’s like riding a motorbike without helmet.
“A new survey from The Commonwealth Fund and The Kaiser Family Foundation asked primary care providers—physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants—about their experiences with and reactions to recent changes in health care delivery and payment.
Providers’ views are generally positive regarding the impact of health information technology on quality of care, but they are more divided on the increased use of medical homes and accountable care organizations.
Overall, providers are more negative about the increased reliance on quality metrics to assess their performance and about financial penalties. Many physicians expressed frustration with the speed and administrative burden of Medicaid and Medicare payments. An earlier brief focused on providers’ experiences under the ACA’s coverage expansions and their opinions about the law.”
Probably each start of a new system is painful and requires people to adapt to it. However, it will have to be carefully monitored as adoption by healthcare providers is crucial for the success of the new system. It will validate the concept of value-based healthcare.
In a little less than 4 years, US healthcare coverage increased from 85 to 90% according to a TIME article.
“Decreasing the number of uninsured is a key goal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which provides Medicaid coverage to many low-income individuals in states that expand and Marketplace subsidies for individuals below 400% of the poverty line.” as stated in an article of KFF.
However, it will be difficult to have a full coverage of the population as some individuals refuse to buy healthcare insurance as they do not see how they could take advantage of the money spent in it. Some of them could simply not afford to buy coverage despite the subsidies.
Moreover, some issues arise with the methodology used to count the number of insured/uninsured people (see the Health Affairs article at the end of the post for more details).
In conclusion and despite all the issues with people not willing to adhere or counting methodology, it is a real progress to expand coverage, especially because US were lagging behind some emerging countries (have a look at the OECD Publication “Health at a Glance 2013” on page 138-139).
And what’s really interesting is the impact of more coverage on global health as a blog post pointed out.
A fascinating article on GABI Online and study written by researchers on the effect of price caps and reference pricing on generics entry. Another study is also available here.
The key points (quotes from the article):
Question: how the use of a price cap along with reference pricing affects the entry of generics after patent expiry?
For reference pricing to stimulate generics entry, the price effect needs to be sufficiently small relative to the demand effect.
If price cap regulation is introduced, the negative effect of reference pricing on generics entry can be reversed, and that reference pricing is more likely to result in cost savings than under free pricing.
If the price cap is sufficiently strict, introducing reference pricing may actually increase the number of generic drugs on the market.
The reason for this is that binding price cap regulation reduces the brand-name price difference between reimbursement schemes with and without reference pricing. Generics makers may therefore obtain higher market shares under reference pricing. Reference pricing is more likely to stimulate generics entry and facilitate cost savings when prices are regulated than in the free pricing equilibrium.
These studies show the price dynamics in the pharmaceutical markets and the impact of price control tool ont generics entry.