Journal Description
Journal of Market Access & Health Policy
Journal of Market Access & Health Policy
(JMAHP) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that covers all different subdisciplines of ‘market access’ from economic, technical, scientific, sociological, psychological and policy perspectives, published quarterly online. It is the official journal of the Market Access Society (MAS). Society members receive discounts on the APCs.
- Open Access— free for readers, with article processing charges (APC) paid by authors or their institutions.
- High Visibility: indexed within Scopus, PubMed, PMC, and other databases.
- Rapid Publication: manuscripts are peer-reviewed and a first decision is provided to authors approximately 40.8 days after submission; acceptance to publication is undertaken in 14.6 days (median values for papers published in this journal in the second half of 2025).
- Journal Rank: CiteScore - Q2 (Health Policy)
- Recognition of Reviewers: APC discount vouchers, optional signed peer review, and reviewer names published annually in the journal.
Latest Articles
Enhancing Patient-Centered Health Technology Assessment: A Modified Delphi Panel for PICOS Scoping in Spinal Muscular Atrophy
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010006 - 19 Jan 2026
Abstract
Objectives: This study explores the feasibility and value of integrating structured patient input into the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Study design) scoping process for Joint Clinical Assessments under the EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation. Methods: A modified Delphi panel, led by a
[...] Read more.
Objectives: This study explores the feasibility and value of integrating structured patient input into the PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Study design) scoping process for Joint Clinical Assessments under the EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation. Methods: A modified Delphi panel, led by a steering committee composed of two clinicians, one patient expert, and one policy expert, engaged 12 individuals representing patient organizations across 12 European Member States to reach consensus on PICOS elements for CAR-T therapy in pediatric spinal muscular atrophy. Results: The Delphi process effectively facilitated PICOS consolidation and consensus among the 12 patient experts representing diverse EU contexts. Through 3 iterative rounds integrating quantitative rankings and qualitative feedback, the panel achieved strong agreement on key outcomes, intervention delivery, and study design elements, with population eligibility and comparator selection showing heterogeneity. Patient engagement was central: participants emphasized inclusive eligibility criteria, shared decision-making, and the inclusion of caregiver perspectives. The integration of qualitative insights allowed nuanced interpretation of dissent, distinguishing between genuine disagreement and framing effects, thereby enhancing transparency and scientific validity. Importantly, the process revealed patient priorities for outcomes, treatment burden, and evidence trade-offs, informing both PICOS refinement and future health technology assessment (HTA) strategies. This structured, participatory approach demonstrates the feasibility and value of incorporating patient voices systematically into early-stage EU HTA, fostering robust, credible, and context-sensitive consensus on complex rare-disease interventions. Conclusions: The study demonstrates the potential of consensus-building methodologies to enhance transparency, reduce heterogeneity, and support patient-centered evidence generation and decision-making in HTA.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
►
Show Figures
Open AccessArticle
Development of a Performance Measurement Framework for European Health Technology Assessment: Stakeholder-Centric Key Performance Indicators Identified in a Delphi Approach by the European Access Academy
by
Elaine Julian, Nicolas S. H. Xander, Konstantina Boumaki, Maria João Garcia, Evelina Jahimovica, Joséphine Mosset-Keane, Monica Hildegard Otto, Mira Pavlovic, Giovanna Scroccaro, Valentina Strammiello, Renato Bernardini, Stefano Capri, Ruben Casado-Arroyo, Thomas Desmet, Walter Van Dyck, Frank-Ulrich Fricke, Fabrizio Gianfrate, Oriol Solà-Morales, Jürgen Wasem, Bernhard J. Wörmann and Jörg Ruofadd
Show full author list
remove
Hide full author list
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 5; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010005 - 15 Jan 2026
Abstract
Background: The objective of this work was to support the implementation of the European Health Technology Assessment Regulation (EU HTAR) and optimize performance of the evolving EU HTA system. Therefore, an inclusive multi-stakeholder framework of key performance indicators (KPI) for success measurement was
[...] Read more.
Background: The objective of this work was to support the implementation of the European Health Technology Assessment Regulation (EU HTAR) and optimize performance of the evolving EU HTA system. Therefore, an inclusive multi-stakeholder framework of key performance indicators (KPI) for success measurement was developed. Methods: A modified Delphi-procedure was applied as follows: (1) development of a generic KPI pool at the Fall Convention 2024 of the European Access Academy (EAA); (2) review of initial pool and identification of additional KPIs; (3) development of prioritized KPIs covering patient, clinician, Health Technology Developer (HTD), and System/Member State (MS) perspectives, and (4) consolidation of the stakeholder-centric KPIs after EAA’s Spring Convention 2025. Results: Steps 1 and 2 of the Delphi procedure revealed 14 generic KPI domains. Steps 3 and 4 resulted in four prioritized KPIs for patients (patient input; utilization of patient-centric outcome measures; time to access; equity); six for clinicians (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes (PICO); addressing uncertainty; clinician involvement; transparency; equity and time to access); four for HTDs (PICO; joint scientific consultation (JSC) process; joint clinical assessment (JCA) process; time to national decision making); five from a system/MS perspective (PICO; learning and training the health system; reducing duplication; equity and time to access). The scope of, e.g., the PICO-related KPI, differed between stakeholder groups. Also, several KPIs intentionally reached beyond the remit of EU HTA as they are also dependent on MS-specific factors including national health systems and budgets. Discussion and Conclusions: The KPI framework developed here presents a step towards the generation of systematic multi-stakeholder evidence to support a successful implementation of the EU HTAR. The relevance of the identified stakeholder-centric KPIs is confirmed by their alignment with the Health System Goals suggested in the context of “Performance measurement for health improvement” by the World Health Organisation. Implementation of the framework, i.e., measurement of KPIs, is envisioned to provide evidence to inform the 2028 revision of the EU HTAR.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
►▼
Show Figures

Figure 1
Open AccessCommunication
Conformity Assessment of Medical Devices: An Overview from a Notified Body
by
Andreas F. Stange and Elaine Julian
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010004 - 8 Jan 2026
Abstract
This perspective provides an in-depth analysis of the role and tasks of Notified Bodies (NBs) under the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR). It explores the conformity assessment process and highlights typical issues encountered. It provides background on the
[...] Read more.
This perspective provides an in-depth analysis of the role and tasks of Notified Bodies (NBs) under the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (IVDR). It explores the conformity assessment process and highlights typical issues encountered. It provides background on the legal framework and roles and tasks of Notified Bodies (NBs). It further explores the seven-step conformity assessment process which aims to ensure that medical devices meet European Union (EU) safety and performance standards. Finally, we highlight typical issues encountered during the process and re-cent developments in the area and conclude with an outlook for the implementation of the MDR and IVDR.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
►▼
Show Figures

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
European Joint Clinical Assessment PICO Scoping Process: Analysis of Current Approaches and Recommendations
by
Kalpana D’Oca, Eline Darquennes, Chloé Garrigues, Aristeidis Draganigos and Natalie Steck
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 3; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010003 - 29 Dec 2025
Abstract
The PICO framework determines the scope of the Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under the EU HTA Regulation (EU HTAR), with PICO consolidation being a critical final step of the scoping process. Due to limited clarity on how consolidation works in practice, Health Technology
[...] Read more.
The PICO framework determines the scope of the Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under the EU HTA Regulation (EU HTAR), with PICO consolidation being a critical final step of the scoping process. Due to limited clarity on how consolidation works in practice, Health Technology Developers (HTDs) may simulate PICO scoping as a strategic tool to guide the development of robust JCA submissions. A review of 14 publications, representing 35 individual PICO exercises across 20 indications (74% in oncology), showed an average of 7 countries participating per exercise and 8 consolidated PICOs per analysis. A separate PICO scoping simulation focused on a first-line immuno-oncology treatment for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) generated 67 PICOs, reflecting the anticipated perspectives of 25 countries, largely driven by biomarker and histology-based sub-populations. The limited number of published examples and country participation restricts the ability to draw clear conclusions or confidently predict the output of PICO scoping in a real life JCA processes. The simulation also raised questions about whether all sub-populations should be included or consolidated further. Overall, there is a need for greater clarity in the JCA PICO scoping process, in particular the consolidation step, to facilitate high-quality evidence generation and support the EU HTAR to meet its goals of efficiency, transparency, and equity in health technology evaluation across Europe, along with more consistent patient access.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
►▼
Show Figures

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
Overcoming Patient Access Barriers in Complex Conditions: Lessons from Schizophrenia for Broader Healthcare Applications
by
Saartje Burgmans, Anne Rieper Hald, Sayagi Tina Markandaier, Nicolas Hall, Rafael Loiseau, Xandra Lie and Bregt Kappelhoff
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 2; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010002 - 23 Dec 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Patient access to innovative care for complex conditions like schizophrenia remains limited by systemic, clinical and policy-level barriers. Cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia (CIAS) illustrates how critical symptom domains are often overlooked despite their impact on long-term outcomes. This study examines how systemic,
[...] Read more.
Patient access to innovative care for complex conditions like schizophrenia remains limited by systemic, clinical and policy-level barriers. Cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia (CIAS) illustrates how critical symptom domains are often overlooked despite their impact on long-term outcomes. This study examines how systemic, infrastructural and economic factors shape access to CIAS care across eight mid-sized European countries to identify shared constraints and opportunities for improvement. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 healthcare professionals and 9 health policy experts. Thematic analysis identified consistent barriers across countries, including fragmented care pathways, insufficient capacity for cognitive assessment, underdeveloped community-based rehabilitation services and reimbursement structures that favour pharmacological over psychosocial interventions. Variability across countries was shaped by differences in community infrastructure, professional training and the breadth of health technology assessment perspectives applied to non-pharmacological care. Countries with stronger community infrastructure and broader reimbursement frameworks were better positioned to deliver comprehensive care. These findings highlight that structural constraints, rather than clinical uncertainty, are the primary impediments to care in complex therapeutic areas. Addressing them will require coordinated reforms that strengthen early identification, expand multidisciplinary rehabilitation capacity and align reimbursement with functional and long-term outcomes.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
Knowledge Spillover and Innovation in Healthcare: A Comparative Study of Social Media Interaction Between Medical Technology Companies and Healthcare Professionals in Austria
by
Mariella Zilahi-Lugbauer and Harald Stummer
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2026, 14(1), 1; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp14010001 - 22 Dec 2025
Abstract
Background: Interactions between healthcare professionals and medical technology companies on social media are central to understanding how variations in knowledge spillover and innovation performance vary. Aim: This study investigates how social media facilitates knowledge exchange between these two stakeholder groups in
[...] Read more.
Background: Interactions between healthcare professionals and medical technology companies on social media are central to understanding how variations in knowledge spillover and innovation performance vary. Aim: This study investigates how social media facilitates knowledge exchange between these two stakeholder groups in Austria, drawing on a cross-sectional online survey of 97 participants (45 healthcare professionals and 52 medical technology company representatives). Data were analyzed using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM), and independent-samples t-tests. The comparative approach enabled the identification of structural differences across stakeholder groups and regions within Austria. Methodology: The study adopts a comparative analysis framework to explore geographic differences within Austria and to examine how social media interaction strengthens dense and strong network ties between healthcare professionals and medical technology companies, thereby enhancing information-processing capabilities. Results: The findings underscore the pivotal role of social media in bridging geographic boundaries, fostering dense and strong network ties, and enhancing information-processing capacities. Conclusions: This study advances the understanding of how digital interaction mechanisms shape knowledge exchange and innovation performance in healthcare outcomes. Practical Implications: The findings suggest that social media promotes stronger professional relationships and deeper customer engagement. The results may assist policymakers and industry leaders aiming to design effective digital strategies for innovation and improved healthcare outcomes.
Full article
Open AccessPerspective
How Patients Can Contribute to the Assessments of Health Technologies
by
François Houÿez and Julien Delaye
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 61; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040061 - 15 Dec 2025
Abstract
In the process of determining whether a health technology should be covered by healthcare systems, patients and their representatives were initially excluded from both evaluations and decision-making. In Europe, direct dialogue between patient organisations and regulatory authorities—particularly in the pharmaceutical sector—began in the
[...] Read more.
In the process of determining whether a health technology should be covered by healthcare systems, patients and their representatives were initially excluded from both evaluations and decision-making. In Europe, direct dialogue between patient organisations and regulatory authorities—particularly in the pharmaceutical sector—began in the early 1990s. It was only decades later, as the high cost of medicines created new challenges, that authorities recognised the necessity of engaging with patients. Patients’ contributions to the assessment of a health technology begin with discussions about the need for the technology in question. Initially, these discussions involve the developer, and later—after research and development—regulators, HTA assessors, and payers. Given that multiple technologies may be under development, patients and their organisations often prioritise those that generate the most interest within the patient community. They can then share their perspectives with evaluators during the horizon-scanning phase. Another key contribution is the role patients play in guiding clinical research by participating in scientific advice. Finally, during the assessment and appraisal stages, various methods are used to gather their views.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
►▼
Show Figures

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
The Pharmaceutical Innovativeness Index: Supporting Value-Based Economic Regulation of Innovative Medicines
by
Ludmila Peres Gargano, Marcus Carvalho Borin, Wallace Mateus Prata, Juliana Alvares-Teodoro, Francisco de Assis Acurcio, Roberto F. Iunes and Augusto Afonso Guerra, Jr.
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 60; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040060 - 8 Dec 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
The regulation of new medicine prices must balance financial sustainability with equitable access to innovation. Value-Based Pricing (VBP) strategies seek to align drug prices with their clinical and societal impact. The Pharmaceutical Innovativeness Index (PII) is a transparent and reproducible tool proposed to
[...] Read more.
The regulation of new medicine prices must balance financial sustainability with equitable access to innovation. Value-Based Pricing (VBP) strategies seek to align drug prices with their clinical and societal impact. The Pharmaceutical Innovativeness Index (PII) is a transparent and reproducible tool proposed to assess the degree of innovativeness of new medicines, with potential to support pricing decisions within economic regulation frameworks. An exploratory qualitative study was conducted through a focus group study was conducted with experts in health economics and pharmaceutical regulation to evaluate the applicability of the PII and to discuss key domains relevant to the assessment of pharmaceutical innovation. Responses were collected anonymously using an interactive digital platform and analyzed through inductive thematic content analysis. Based on these findings, the research team developed a conceptual pricing model integrating the PII with additional value-based criteria. Two hypothetical case studies were created to explore its practical feasibility. Participants identified Added Therapeutic Value (ATV) and Unmet Therapeutic Need (UTN) as the most relevant domains, while Methodological Quality (MQ) and Study Design (SD) were also recognized as essential to ensure rigor and reduce bias. The PII scores showed strong alignment with expert judgment in the illustrative case studies. The proposed model incorporates international best practices—such as the efficiency frontier approach—and additional dimensions including safety and incremental innovation. Overall, the PII demonstrated potential to enhance transparency, consistency, and regulatory efficiency in drug pricing decisions in Brazil. However, it should currently be regarded as an exploratory framework requiring further empirical validation and regulatory adaptation before implementation.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessSystematic Review
Cost-Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Economic Analysis
by
Jennifer M. Smith, John Posnett and Emma J. Woodmansey
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 59; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040059 - 24 Nov 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Hard-to-heal wounds are a major burden to healthcare systems. Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) is known to improve clinical outcomes, but cost-effectiveness analysis is lacking. The aim was to explore the cost-effectiveness of EST with standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone. A systematic
[...] Read more.
Hard-to-heal wounds are a major burden to healthcare systems. Electrical stimulation therapy (EST) is known to improve clinical outcomes, but cost-effectiveness analysis is lacking. The aim was to explore the cost-effectiveness of EST with standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies (RCTs) were conducted. Fourteen RCTs were identified, representing 783 patients. EST + SoC, versus SoC alone, significantly increased the proportion of wounds healed (odds ratio [OR] 2.46 [95% CI, 1.75–3.46], p < 0.0001) and significantly decreased the mean time to healing (−2.67 weeks (95% CI, 1.49–3.84, p < 0.00001). A cost-effectiveness model was developed based on these findings and on the usage and cost of the EST device used in the largest included RCT. Weekly costs of community wound care were taken from published estimates and inflated to 2024 levels, reflecting costs in the UK. In a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients treated over 12 weeks, EST + SoC was estimated to save over GBP 38,000 overall, reduce nursing visits by 385 and lead to 154 more ulcer-free weeks. In conclusion, EST used in the community is a cost-effective addition to SoC with the ability to improve outcomes and reduce human and financial burden of hard-to-heal wounds.
Full article

Graphical abstract
Open AccessSystematic Review
Network Meta-Analysis of Bevacizumab Gamma Versus Competing Interventions for Treating Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the United Kingdom
by
Maria Lorenzi, Stephen Ebohon, Jennifer Kissner, Jedd Comiskey, Mayke Paap, Christine Bouchet, Andy Garnham and Erika Wissinger
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 58; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040058 - 19 Nov 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy of bevacizumab gamma (an ophthalmic formulation of bevacizumab) versus alternative interventions relevant to the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in the United Kingdom (UK) via a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis
[...] Read more.
This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy of bevacizumab gamma (an ophthalmic formulation of bevacizumab) versus alternative interventions relevant to the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) in the United Kingdom (UK) via a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). An SLR was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapies for the treatment of nAMD in adult patients relevant to the UK context. The included anti-VEGF treatments were ranibizumab, aflibercept, faricimab, and bevacizumab gamma. Bayesian NMA models were used to estimate relative efficacy in terms of change from baseline (CFB) in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 12 months, the proportion of patients gaining 15 or more letters at 12 months, and the proportion of patients losing less than 15 letters at 12 months. Twenty-two relevant RCTs were included in the NMA. At 12 months, all anti-VEGF treatments were similarly efficacious to ranibizumab 0.5 mg every four weeks (Q4W) in terms of CFB in BCVA, the proportion of patients gaining 15 or more letters, and the proportion of patients losing less than 15 letters (except for ranibizumab 0.5 mg every 12 weeks [Q12W] and ranibizumab 0.5 mg pro re nata [PRN]). Bevacizumab gamma provided similar improvements in visual acuity to other anti-VEGF treatments.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
Criterion-Related Validity and Reliability of a Measurement Tool for Medical Doctors’ Work-Related Quality of Life in Japan
by
Miyuki Ezura, Katsuhiko Sawada, Yusuke Takushima, Lida Teng and Ataru Igarashi
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 57; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040057 - 14 Nov 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Objective: This confirmatory survey aimed to verify the criterion-related validity and reliability of the final version of the Medical Doctors’ Work-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire (WQMD-9), following partial revision of its content. This study also explored the questionnaire’s structure and scoring methods. Method:
[...] Read more.
Objective: This confirmatory survey aimed to verify the criterion-related validity and reliability of the final version of the Medical Doctors’ Work-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire (WQMD-9), following partial revision of its content. This study also explored the questionnaire’s structure and scoring methods. Method: From June to July 2022, the WQMD-9 was administered to 98 MDs selected to match the statistical distribution of MDs in Japan. Criterion-related validity was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) as the reference standard, and reliability was examined using inter-dimension correlations and Cronbach’s α. Results: The correlation coefficient between the VAS score and the simple sum of WQMD-9 dimensions scores was 0.7891, supporting criterion-related validity. Cronbach’s α was 0.87, indicating acceptable reliability. Conclusions: The profile-type WQMD-9 consists of nine dimensions—“Workload,” “Working time,” “Collaboration,” “Clinical practice,” “Working conditions,” “Working environment,” “Feelings of fatigue,” “Work-life balance,” and “Career”—with five levels. In the confirmatory survey population, the WQMD-9 demonstrated criterion-related validity and reliability, suggesting that it can be utilized with simple total scoring approach.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
Patient Perspectives on Health Insurance Design: A Mixed-Methods Analysis
by
Bridget Doherty, Kimberly Hooks, Ulrich Neumann, Wesley Peters, Steven Zona and Lisa Shea
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 56; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040056 - 14 Nov 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
There remains a persistent lack of patient-centered evidence on insurance reform and real-world experiences of patients with chronic disease. This study gathered insights around insurance design from chronic disease beneficiaries. This mixed-methods analysis comprised an online survey and virtual focus group sessions (August
[...] Read more.
There remains a persistent lack of patient-centered evidence on insurance reform and real-world experiences of patients with chronic disease. This study gathered insights around insurance design from chronic disease beneficiaries. This mixed-methods analysis comprised an online survey and virtual focus group sessions (August to December 2023) involving US residents with chronic disease and health insurance. Patients’ perspectives on insurance design were explored. Survey data were analyzed descriptively. Key themes were identified from focus group transcripts and direct observations. In total, 146 patients across 15 chronic diseases completed the survey; 29 then participated in focus groups. Although most beneficiaries were satisfied with their health plan, concerns centered on prescription medication affordability due to high deductibles and cost exposure, the disproportionate effects of cost exposure based on income, and the unpredictability of out-of-pocket costs. For some, the financial burden led to financial debt, therapy abandonment, mental health issues, and/or worsening of their condition. Overall, there was broad support for policy solutions to redesign insurance and adjust cost exposure for patients with chronic disease. This research offers valuable patient insights into health insurance design in the US to ensure patients’ needs are addressed.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
The Impact of Copay Accumulators and Maximizers on Treatment Patterns, Adherence, and Costs Among Patients with Major Depressive and Bipolar Disorders Treated with Branded Therapies
by
Onur Baser, Katarzyna Rodchenko, Heidi C. Waters, Matthew Sullivan, Lixuan Wu, Shuangrui Chen, Madeline Shurtleff, Cynthia Bigley and Rashmi Patel
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040055 - 7 Nov 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Copay accumulator (CA) and copay maximizer (CM) programs in the United States, which prevent manufacturer copay assistance from counting toward deductibles or out-of-pocket (OOP) maximums, are increasingly used, raising concerns about costs and outcomes for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar
[...] Read more.
Copay accumulator (CA) and copay maximizer (CM) programs in the United States, which prevent manufacturer copay assistance from counting toward deductibles or out-of-pocket (OOP) maximums, are increasingly used, raising concerns about costs and outcomes for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BPD) treated with branded atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) and/or antidepressants (ADs). This retrospective claims study used Kythera commercial data (2020–2024) in the United States to identify adults with MDD or BPD who had at least 1 diagnosis and one branded AAP or AD prescription between 2021 and 2023, requiring 12 months’ continuous enrollment pre- (2020–2021) and post-index (2023–2024) and at least three months of post-index branded medication use. This retrospective claims study used Kythera commercial data (2020–2024) to identify adults with MDD or BPD who had at least one diagnosis and one branded AAP or AD prescription between 2021 and 2023, requiring 12 months’ continuous enrollment pre- and post-index and at least 3 months of post-index branded medication use. Patients were stratified into CA, CM, or standard copay plan (SCP) cohorts, and propensity score matching was used to compare treatment patterns and costs. Both CA and CM groups had significantly higher median OOP costs than SCPs (e.g., $75/$60 vs. $16 for MDD+AAP; p < 0.0001), and higher pharmacy costs among adherent patients. CA patients had poorer adherence and persistence, shorter treatment duration, and higher discontinuation and abandonment rates than SCPs. These findings highlight higher OOP burden and adherence challenges with CA and CM programs, underscoring the need for careful benefit design for US mental health patients.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
How the Stakeholders’ Perception Contributes to the Pharmaceutical Strategies: A Regional Case Study in Latin America
by
Talita da Silva Ferreira, Giovanni M. Pauletti and Luis Vázquez-Suárez
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 54; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040054 - 23 Oct 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Background: Stakeholders’ perception plays a crucial role in shaping pharmaceutical strategies. Stakeholders are groups interested in pharmaceutical companies’ success and outcomes. Stakeholders’ perceptions are multifaceted and impact pharmaceutical strategies, from shaping research to enhancing market access, pricing, and corporate reputation. Understanding and
[...] Read more.
Background: Stakeholders’ perception plays a crucial role in shaping pharmaceutical strategies. Stakeholders are groups interested in pharmaceutical companies’ success and outcomes. Stakeholders’ perceptions are multifaceted and impact pharmaceutical strategies, from shaping research to enhancing market access, pricing, and corporate reputation. Understanding and actively managing stakeholders’ perceptions is vital for pharmaceutical companies to succeed in an increasingly complex and competitive industry. Methods: In this case study, knowledge contributions from stakeholders offered insights and strategies for application in the pharmaceutical sector. Results: Qualitative, exploratory research was conducted, which included the participation of sixteen stakeholders from different countries in Latin America, who responded to a semi-structured interview script, whose data were understood through lexical analysis in the Interface de R pour les Analyses Multimensionnelles de Texts et de Questionnaires (IRaMuTeQ). Conclusions: The results of this study underscore the importance of regulatory knowledge for professionals’ support and implementation of international strategies. Regulatory knowledge provides professionals with tools and insights to navigate complex regulatory environments, make informed decisions, and enhance organizational performance in global markets.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessArticle
A Data-Driven Approach for Estimating Type 2 Diabetes-Related Costs in Greece
by
Elisavet Nika, Thomas Tsiampalis, Athanasios Sachlas, Evangelos Liberopoulos, Sotirios Bersimis and Dimitrios Georgakellos
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 53; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040053 - 15 Oct 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) constitutes a major health problem, reaching alarming rates over the last decades, especially due to contemporary lifestyle and associated obesogenic environments, as well as the aging population. Diabetes not only causes social consequences but also leads to increasing healthcare
[...] Read more.
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) constitutes a major health problem, reaching alarming rates over the last decades, especially due to contemporary lifestyle and associated obesogenic environments, as well as the aging population. Diabetes not only causes social consequences but also leads to increasing healthcare costs, posing a significant challenge for the health system. This paper applies a five-step approach for estimating T2D-related costs in Greece. The approach initially estimates the T2D-related ICD10 prevalence and the target population. Next it applies the appropriate therapeutic protocols to identify the most appropriate treatments. Subsequently, it calculates the total cost of medical treatments for each target population, based on the distribution of patients between the different treatments and treatment lines. Finally, based on the diagnostic and treatment protocols, it calculates the annual direct costs associated with the cost categories. Using the estimated future population of the country, the proposed methodology can also project the budget required, under certain conditions, to deal with T2D. The analysis estimated that T2D-related costs in 2021 under rational use of resources were EUR 1,397,871,172.55 billion and EUR 1,512,934,947.63 billion projected in the year 2030 considering the aging effect, per cost category, and in total, presenting an increase of approximately 115 million euros in 2030 compared to 2021. The term “rational use of resources” in this study refers to the use of internationally recognized, evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic protocols, as adopted by the Greek Ministry of Health. This scenario represents an idealized standard of care rather than actual real-world adherence and is used to estimate the potential resource needs under optimal medical practice conditions. An inflation rate of 4.2% was applied to costs between 2021 and 2030. The analysis showed that the highest percentage (39%) of the total T2D-related healthcare expenditures is associated with complications that occur in T2D patients. Despite a comparatively modest prevalence of T2D in Greece relative to other European and Mediterranean countries, the economic burden associated with its management remains high. The aging of the population will lead to an increase in the total cost of T2D. The applied methodology of estimating budgets by aggregating categories of expenses under a specific disease (ICD10), instead of dividing budgets into categories of expenses, can successfully lead to the optimization and rationalization of expenses according to actual needs. The findings underline the significant economic burden of T2D in Greece, particularly due to complications and population aging. These results emphasize the urgent need for health policy strategies focusing on prevention, early intervention, and the efficient allocation of healthcare resources. The methodology applied can serve as a decision-making tool for forecasting healthcare budgets and optimizing expenditures under different population and treatment scenarios.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessOpinion
EU Joint Clinical Assessment: A Framework for Optimising Use with Cost-Effectiveness Decision-Making
by
Adam Johns, André Andrade, Sukhvinder Johal and James Ryan
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 52; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040052 - 9 Oct 2025
Abstract
The introduction of the European Union (EU) Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 marks a transformative step in harmonizing health technology assessments (HTAs) across EU member states. This article explores the implications of JCA, particularly in oncology, for member states who
[...] Read more.
The introduction of the European Union (EU) Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 marks a transformative step in harmonizing health technology assessments (HTAs) across EU member states. This article explores the implications of JCA, particularly in oncology, for member states who utilize cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis and health technology developers (HTDs) who produce this evidence. The JCA framework attempts to standardise the assessment of relative clinical effectiveness and safety across the EU to input into national appraisals. Importantly, it excludes economic evaluations that may be required nationally, necessitating HTDs to align their CE models with the JCA PICO (Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome) parameters outlined by member states. This article discusses the challenges and opportunities for aligning JCA and CE modelling outcomes, contrasting evidence requirements between JCA and CE frameworks. It highlights the potential increase in complexity due to the diverse comparators in PICO surveys, necessitating the use of indirect comparison methodologies. It further underscores the importance of early communication between HTDs and HTA bodies to ensure timely, relevant, and pragmatic decision-making. By sharing national PICOs upfront to support national evidence generation, the JCA framework’s potential to aid high-quality decision-making and improve patient access to innovative medicines can be maximised.
Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA))
Open AccessArticle
Examining State Policies and Administrative Factors as Determinants of Consumer-Reported Unmet Service Needs in Publicly Funded Home- and Community-Based Services in the United States
by
Romil R. Parikh, Tetyana P. Shippee, Benjamin Langworthy, Zheng Wang, Stephanie Giordano and Eric Jutkowitz
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 51; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040051 - 2 Oct 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Access to home- and community-based services (HCBSs) varies substantially between states. Yet, it is unknown how state-level policies and administrative factors impact consumer-reported unmet service needs, an important indicator of HCBS access and quality. Using the National Core Indicators—Aging and Disability Adult Consumer
[...] Read more.
Access to home- and community-based services (HCBSs) varies substantially between states. Yet, it is unknown how state-level policies and administrative factors impact consumer-reported unmet service needs, an important indicator of HCBS access and quality. Using the National Core Indicators—Aging and Disability Adult Consumer Survey (2016–2019; n = 13,654 community-dwelling older adults, 13 states), we examined associations between unmet HCBS needs with four state-level factors: HCBS spending relative to institutional care spending, HCBS spending per client, percentage of Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care, and Medicaid expansion; and funding program. In the adjusted logistic regression model, the odds of overall unmet HCBS needs were lower with higher percentage Medicaid beneficiaries in managed care (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–0.96) and Medicaid expansion (aOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73–0.87) but greater with higher HCBS spending relative to institutional care spending (aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.11–1.28). Compared to Medicaid waiver, odds of unmet HCBS needs were significantly lower among consumers in Managed Long-Term Services and Supports (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.61–0.74) and Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE; aOR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.31–0.49). State policies and administrative factors are important place-based determinants of HCBS consumers’ unmet HCBS needs/access; and warrant consideration in HCBS quality assurance and improvement.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessOpinion
Vaccine Development, Its Implementation and Price Setting: A Historical Perspective with Proposed Ways to Move Forward
by
Baudouin Standaert, Oleksandr Topachevskyi and Olivier Ethgen
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 50; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040050 - 2 Oct 2025
Abstract
Vaccination has resulted in substantial public health benefits for human populations worldwide since it was first introduced more than a century ago. This article presents an overview of the history of vaccine development, its implementation, and price setting, the latter mainly from a
[...] Read more.
Vaccination has resulted in substantial public health benefits for human populations worldwide since it was first introduced more than a century ago. This article presents an overview of the history of vaccine development, its implementation, and price setting, the latter mainly from a developed world perspective. It considers potential issues and challenges. Over time, vaccine development and production has evolved to a market-driven approach, conducted largely by private commercial entities. The complex processes of identifying potential vaccine targets and developing and producing vaccines at scale have now become more efficient. However, vaccine pricing is an emerging concern. The elements that maximize the overall health benefit of vaccination include high volume, high coverage, and rapid initial implementation to achieve the high coverage with the vaccine as quickly as possible. It therefore requires substantial initial investment. Consequently, the price set for the vaccine should be reasonable to avoid limiting the coverage given the available budget. Suboptimal coverage leads to suboptimal benefit if herd protection is not fully achieved. This may disappoint health authorities and may result in program discontinuation. Conventional cost-effectiveness analysis is therefore not ideally suited to vaccine price setting, as it is based on the concept of ‘more for more’, i.e., higher health gain achieved at a higher reimbursement cost that does not account for limited budgets. Constrained optimization (CO) combines value assessment with constrained budget allocation into one analysis method and may therefore be the better option for vaccine pricing.
Full article
Open AccessArticle
Balancing Costs and Clinical Outcomes: A Cost-Effectiveness Study of PICC Types Across Chinese Healthcare Settings
by
Jia Xu, Hossein Zare, Xia Yan, Herng-Chia Chiu and Renan Castillo
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 49; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040049 - 29 Sep 2025
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Long-term intravenous therapies often necessitate the use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Antimicrobial-coated PICCs have been introduced to minimize central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). A decision-analytic cost-effectiveness model was developed from a societal perspective, utilizing real-world data concerning PICC-related complications and costs
[...] Read more.
Long-term intravenous therapies often necessitate the use of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs). Antimicrobial-coated PICCs have been introduced to minimize central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). A decision-analytic cost-effectiveness model was developed from a societal perspective, utilizing real-world data concerning PICC-related complications and costs from Class 3A hospitals and community hospital settings in China. The analysis compared the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for patients receiving antimicrobial-coated PICCs versus standard PICCs, with catheter-associated costs included. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated in Chinese Yuan (CNY) per QALY gained. Patients with antimicrobial-coated PICCs experienced slightly fewer complication-related events, leading to significantly lower costs for managing complications. In the Class 3A hospital setting, the average total cost per patient was lower with antimicrobial-coated PICCs (CNY 62,800) compared to standard PICCs (CNY 102,900), primarily due to the reduced expenses for treating CLABSIs and related unknown fever. The ICER demonstrated that the coated PICC was the strongest option, showing a negative ICER (cost-saving of approximately CNY 4 million per QALY gained in the base-case Class 3A hospital scenario). In community hospital care scenarios, the cost advantage of antimicrobial-coated PICCs remained. Thus, the antimicrobial-coated PICC strategy was cost-saving, providing equal or improved health outcomes at lower costs in China’s medical center and community hospitals, making it a more efficient choice for long-term vascular access.
Full article

Figure 1
Open AccessReview
Clinical and Economic Evidence Supporting the Value of Fluorescence Imaging of Bacteria in Wound Care
by
Jonathan Johnson and Gregory Bohn
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(4), 48; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13040048 - 26 Sep 2025
Cited by 1
Abstract
►▼
Show Figures
Wound infection significantly hinders the healing process. Clinical signs and symptoms (CSS) of infection are used to assess the presence of infection and guide whether to intervene. However, CSS may not be dependable, lacking sensitivity and specificity, and may not accurately reflect bacterial
[...] Read more.
Wound infection significantly hinders the healing process. Clinical signs and symptoms (CSS) of infection are used to assess the presence of infection and guide whether to intervene. However, CSS may not be dependable, lacking sensitivity and specificity, and may not accurately reflect bacterial load. The interpretation of CSS can be subjective and can vary between clinicians since they depend on patient characteristics, type of wound, and stage of infection. In addition, conditions such as peripheral vascular disease or diabetes can mask the signs and symptoms of infection. Inaccurate or late diagnosis of infected wounds can be costly to the patient and to healthcare systems. Fluorescence imaging (FLI) provides a safe, objective, highly sensitive approach to detect clinically significant bacterial levels in wounds. This information allows individualized treatment plans and a way to monitor bacterial burden and wound healing longitudinally. This publication reviews the evidence for point-of-care FLI as a means of improving wound identification with a high bacterial burden and the clinical and healthcare economic benefits of earlier and more accurate detection of bacteria.
Full article

Graphical abstract
Highly Accessed Articles
Latest Books
E-Mail Alert
News
6 November 2025
MDPI Launches the Michele Parrinello Award for Pioneering Contributions in Computational Physical Science
MDPI Launches the Michele Parrinello Award for Pioneering Contributions in Computational Physical Science
Topics
Conferences
Special Issues
Special Issue in
JMAHP
Health Technology Assessment of Vaccination: Strategies, Public Health and Values: 2nd Edition
Guest Editors: Maarten J. Postma, Jurjen Van der Schans, Cornelis BoersmaDeadline: 28 February 2027
Topical Collections
Topical Collection in
JMAHP
European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA)
Collection Editors: Jörg Ruof, Mondher Toumi

