Capítulo 4 Análisis económico del derecho tributario sancionador
4.2. Eficiencia en el ejercicio de la sanción por inexactitud para lograr el objetivo de la misma.
977
[ 25] Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee Report of the Committee Inquiry on the Outcomes of the
978
42nd Meeting of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) held on 1 April 2016. (Published by Parliament)
979
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Finance_and_Public_Administration/COAG/Repor
980
t Accessed 22 September 2016
981
[26] Antioch KM Submission to the Select Committee on Health inquiry into health policy, administration and
982
expenditure (2016b) See submission 204 Accessed 22 September 2016
983
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Health/Health/Submissions
984
30
[27] Select Committee on Health inquiry into health policy, administration and expenditure Final report Hospital
985
funding cuts: the perfect storm The demolition of Federal-State health relations 2014–2016 (2016) Accessed 22
986
September 2016987
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Health/Health/Final_Report988
989
[28] NHMRC: Procedures and requirements for meeting the 2011 NHMRC standard for clinical practice guidelines
990
May 2011 Version 1.1 Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council. (2011)
991
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/cp133_nhmrc_procedures_requirements_guidelines_v1.1_120125.992
pdfAccessed 15 May 2015
993
994
[29] NHMRC: Using socioeconomic evidence in clinical practice guidelines Canberra National Health and Medical
995
Research Council (2002) https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/cp89.pdf
Accessed 15 May
996
2015
997
998
[30] NHMRC: NHMRC additional levels of evidence and grades of recommendations for developers of guidelines'
999
Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council. (2009)
1000
http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/guidelines/stage_2_consultation_levels_and_grades.pdf
Accessed 15 May 2015
1001
1002
[31] Polsky, Daniel. "Does willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year bring us closer to a useful decision rule for
1003
cost-effectiveness analysis?" Medical Decision Making 25.6 (2005): 605 - 606
1004
http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/25/6/605.full.pdf+html Accessed 22 September 2016
1005
[32]
https://www.york.ac.uk/che/research/teehta/thresholds/ Accessed 22 September 20161006
1007
[33] Claxton K, Martin S, Soares M, Rice N, Spackman E, Hinde S, Devlin N, Smith PC, Sculpher M. Methods for the estimation
1008
of the NICE cost effectiveness threshold Health Technology Assessment. Available on the NIHR Journals Library website
1009
(http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta) from the 19th of February 2015. Accessed 22 September 2016
1010
1011
[34] University of York Media Release Approval of new drugs by NICE is doing more harm than good The NHS is paying too
1012
much for new drugs 19th February 2015 Accessed 22 September 2016
1013
https://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/NICE%20Threshold%20Press%20Release%20190215.pdf
1014
1015
[35] Harris A, Hill S, Chin G, Li JJ, Walkom E.:The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for
1016
drugs in Australia. A retrospective analysis 1994-2004. Medical Decision Making.;28,5:713-722 (2008)
1017
http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/28/5/713.short
Accessed 15 May 2015
1018
1019
[36] Harris, A Li JJ and Yong K What Can We Expect from Value-Based Funding of Medicines? A Retrospective
1020
Study? PharmacoEconomics (2016) 34:393–402DOI 10.1007/s40273-015-0354-z Accessed 22 September 2016
1021
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40273-015-0354-z
1022
1023
[37] Shiroiwa T, Sung YK, Fukuda T, Lang HC, Bae SC, Tsutani K.: International survey on willingness-to-pay (WTP)
1024
for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness? Health Econ.Apr;19(4):422-37. (2010)
1025
doi: 10.1002/hec.148l http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19382128
Accessed 15 May 2015
1026
1027
[38] Drummond, M.F., de Pouvourville, G., Jones, E., Haig, J., Saba, G., Cawston, H.: A comparative analysis of two
1028
contrasting European approaches for rewarding the value added by drugs for cancer: England versus France.
1029
PharmacoEconomics, 32:5, 509-520. (2014) Doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0144-z
1030
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24599784
Accessed 15 May 2015
1031
1032
[39] Husereau, D., Drummond, M.F., Petrou S., Carswell, C., Moher, D, Greenberg, D., Augustovski, F., Briggs, A.H.,
1033
Mauskopf, J. and Loder, E.: Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS): Explanation
1034
and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices
1035
Task Force. Value in Health, 16, 231–50 (2013)
1036
http://www.ispor.org/ValueInHealth/ShowValueInHealth.aspx?issue=3D35FDBC-D569-431D-8C27-378B8F99EC67Accessed
1037
15 May 20151038
1039
[40] National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) A guide to the methods of technology appraisal.London,
1040
July (2013) http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/devnicetech/guidetothemethodsoftechnologyappraisal.jsp Accessed 15
1041
May 2015
1042
1043
[41 ] Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG.: Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines.
1044
PLoS Medicine. 7(2):e1000217 (2010) http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217
1045
Accessed 15 May 2015
1046
31
[42 Langley P_Sunlit Uplands: The Genius of the NICE Reference Case: Innovations in Pharmacy Vol 7, No 2 Article
1048
12 pg 1-6(2016)
1049
1050
[43] Drummond M and McGuire A Economic Evaluation in Health Care Merging Theory with Practice (2006)
1051
1052
[44] Peacock, S Mitton C and Cromwell I: Structuring Complex Evidence and Values Using Multi-Criteria Decision
1053
Analysis (MCDA) Presentation in the Organised Session on "Economic Guidelines for Clinical Guidelines 2013
1054
International Health Economic Association (IHEA), Sydney Australia. (2013)
1055
1056
[45] Thokala, P Devlin, N Marsh, K et al Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Health Care Decision Making—An
1057
Introduction:Report1 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force Value in Health 1
1058
https://www.ispor.org/Multi-Criteria-Decision-Analysis-guideline.pdf 9 (2016) 1 – 1 3 2016 ISPOR Task Force
1059
Report Accessed 22 September 2016