Difference between revisions of "Comparison criteria"
From Testiwiki
(Created page with ":'''This page will be translated shortly == Kysymys == Mitä pneumokokkikonjugaattirokotteiden vertailuperusteita pitäisi käyttää syksyllä 2014 tehtävässä hankintaki...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | == Question == | |
| − | + | Which comparison criteria should be used for pneumococcal conjugatevaccines in the tendering process in the autumn of 2014, in which(?) a vaccine is aquired for the national vaccination programme for children? | |
| + | * Possible comparison criteria include prize, benefits(?), safety and technical properties. | ||
| + | ** Prize refers to the bargaining prize of the vaccine. | ||
| + | ** Benefits refers to the decrease in desease burden caused by large scale use of the vaccine. As a result the quality of life connected to health increases and health care costs decrease. | ||
| + | ** Safety | ||
| + | ** Technical properties | ||
| + | * The benefits of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine can be assessed by the decrease of desease caused by pneumococcus and Haemophilus influenzae -bacteria. | ||
| + | * The benefit is assessed in the entire Finnish population. | ||
| − | + | == Answer == | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | The original proposal is that the comparison of the vaccines will concentrate on the prize and the assessed benefits. Benefit is assessed according to invasive pneumococcal deseases. Hyötyä arvioidaan invasiivisen pneumokokkitaudin perustella. | |
| − | + | This original proposal is the basis for the conversation beginning in the summer of 2014. | |
| − | + | == Rationale == | |
| − | |||
| − | == | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | Hankintalaki(?) only allows clearly demonstrated differences proportionable to the benefits of products as comparison criteria. Practirally often especially so called technical differences cannot be taken into account. There have been no differences in the safety demonstrated in licenced pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
{{pneumococcal vaccine}} | {{pneumococcal vaccine}} | ||
Revision as of 10:58, 21 June 2014
Contents
Question
Which comparison criteria should be used for pneumococcal conjugatevaccines in the tendering process in the autumn of 2014, in which(?) a vaccine is aquired for the national vaccination programme for children?
- Possible comparison criteria include prize, benefits(?), safety and technical properties.
- Prize refers to the bargaining prize of the vaccine.
- Benefits refers to the decrease in desease burden caused by large scale use of the vaccine. As a result the quality of life connected to health increases and health care costs decrease.
- Safety
- Technical properties
- The benefits of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine can be assessed by the decrease of desease caused by pneumococcus and Haemophilus influenzae -bacteria.
- The benefit is assessed in the entire Finnish population.
Answer
The original proposal is that the comparison of the vaccines will concentrate on the prize and the assessed benefits. Benefit is assessed according to invasive pneumococcal deseases. Hyötyä arvioidaan invasiivisen pneumokokkitaudin perustella.
This original proposal is the basis for the conversation beginning in the summer of 2014.
Rationale
Hankintalaki(?) only allows clearly demonstrated differences proportionable to the benefits of products as comparison criteria. Practirally often especially so called technical differences cannot be taken into account. There have been no differences in the safety demonstrated in licenced pneumococcal conjugate vaccines.
See also
