L’accès au marché des médicaments en France au travers des contrats de paiement à la performance : solution crédible et extrapolable ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Performance-based contracts are one of the existing modalities to allow the financing and payment by National Helath System of medicines, as soon as they are reimbursable. As a first step, a description of the procedure for entering the market for the medicinal product, i.e. obtaining its reimbursement and price, as well as a description of existing contracts were carried out. Through a systematic literature review, an inventory of these contracts was conducted in Europe, the United States, Canada and Australia. An analysis was then carried out to identify the main and recurring characteristics that seem to allow the implementation of these contracts for a given molecule. Finally, from a French perspective this time, an explanation is given on the reasons for a dichotomy in the use of these contracts between France and the rest of the world, and on the potential levers to be used with a view to their potential generalization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.048 | 0.146 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".