IVI is a collaboration among thought leaders in academia, patient advocacy organizations, payers, life sciences firms, providers, delivery systems and other organizations dedicated to preserving innovation, value, and choice in the health care system.
IVI works to preserve innovation and enhance value across the health care system by creating common approaches for relevant, rigorous, and transparent value assessments in health care, identifying, supporting and disseminating best practices. We aim to translate these value assessments into practical solutions that better align prices with value throughout the marketplace.
IVI believes that only an informed and dispassionate dialogue around value assessment can ensure the future vitality of the American health care system. We hope to fuel that dialogue with timely, non-biased and well-focused research, evidence and analysis.
IVI conducts research in four core areas:
- Developing open-source platforms for measuring value
- Building tools to support decision making
- Improving the science of value measurement
- Identifying and promoting better health policy
For more information, please visit the What We Do section.
IVI’s Strategic Advisory Panel determines the topics of interest. The Panel is a multi-stakeholder group that reflects the diverse perspectives found across the health care system and meets in person at least once per year and via teleconference quarterly to create and update the yearly research agenda.
IVI holds itself to the highest research standards by relying on extensive peer review by relevant thought leaders in the field. All published IVI research reports under peer review of the scientific methods and results (see next FAQ for more on peer review). The IVI multi-stakeholder Strategic Advisory Panel reviews IVI research to ensure significance to the marketplace and alignment with IVI’s mission.
All IVI research is subject to peer review. Research papers submitted to peer-reviewed journals undergo review requirements as specified by the journal. Research reports that are released through the IVI website are reviewed by independent academics, whose reviews and evaluations are made public alongside the research report of interest. Commentaries and opinion pieces are edited according to the standards of the publishing outlet; these typically do not include academic peer review.
IVI research and policy proposals are developed by known thought leaders and respected researchers with a goal of leveraging evidence to improve the U.S. health care system. IVI research is then disseminated simultaneously through a variety of high-impact channels: peer-reviewed journals, reports, commentaries, blog posts, working group meetings, policy briefings and other forums.
A diversity of viewpoints from academia, patients, payers, pharmaceutical companies, providers, and delivery systems increases the influence and broad applicability of IVI’s research. IVI leverages leaders from across academia, government and the health care industry that serve on the Strategic Advisory Panel to champion our work and bring this research to the attention of the health care system’s leading decision makers.
Leading up to IVI’s launch in September 2016, funding was provided solely by Precision Medicine Group. Active recruitment of funding members is now underway, with representation being sought from insurers, providers, manufacturers, and patient advocacy groups. Current partners now include AbbVie, Amgen, Biotechnology Innovation Organization, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Merck, National Pharmaceutical Council, Pfizer, PhRMA, Sanofi, and UCB. We look forward to expanding this support across all stakeholder audiences in an effort to enhance value, innovation, and choice across the health care system. Funding is provided in support of IVI’s mission and core objectives, but funding does not equate to a voting seat on the Strategic Advisory Panel that steers IVI’s research agenda.
For more information on how to get involved in finding solutions to the challenge of achieving high-value care, please e-mail us at email@example.com.
- IVI develops, tests, and demonstrates the benefits of evidence-based proposals for improving the U.S. health care system.
- To ensure the practical impact of this research, IVI brings together diverse viewpoints from academia, patients, payers, pharmaceutical companies, providers, delivery systems, and other stakeholders.
- The findings of this work are disseminated simultaneously through a variety of high-impact channels: peer-reviewed journals, white papers, editorials, blog posts, working group meetings, policy briefings and other forums.
- As IVI leverages leaders from across academia, government and the health care industry, its work is championed and brought to the attention of the health care system’s key decision makers.
Ultimately, IVI aims to ensure that patients in the U.S. health care system receive the highest quality, highest value care in the world.
For more information on joining or working with IVI, please send us a message at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Open-Source Value Project is an open, collaborative, and consensus-driven process for developing open-source models for value assessment of medical interventions. To learn more, visit the Open-Source Value Project page.
There are many ways to use the IVI-RA model to compare treatment value in RA. These include:
- IVI-RA Value Tool: Streamlined tool designed for a general user and requiring no existing expertise
- IVI-RA Model Interface: Online user interface for fully customizable analysis
- iviRA R Package: Downloadable statistical package for customized analysis
- Source Code (on GitHub): For programmers and others who wish to contribute improving the code or adapting it to a unique context
For more information, see the IVI-RA Value Model page.
The current version of the IVI-RA Value Tool is primarily designed to support a diverse range of population-level decisions around how to best allocate limited health care dollars, but the information it provides is valuable to a wide range of stakeholders making many different kinds of decisions. For examples, click here.
Given the burden of rheumatoid arthritis, the need for long term treatment and increased scrutiny of the prices of available therapies, there is growing interest in assessing the value of alternative treatment strategies. Value assessments in RA are often complex, in part because the disease evolves over a long period of time. What’s more, different researchers often employ different assumptions and methods that can lead to different conclusions about value. The complexity and ambiguity of the problem, along with the rapid rate of innovation and accumulation of evidence, made RA an appropriate choice for IVI’s OSVP model development. In the future, IVI intends to develop models for other disease states as well.
Treatments that are included in the IVI-RA model include:
- Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab)
- Non-TNF inhibitors (abatecept, rituximab, tocilizumab)
- Janus kinase/signal transducers and activators of transcription (JAK/STAT) inhibitors (tofacitinib)
- Conventional DMARDs (e.g., methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine)
Dr. Jeffrey Curtis, a rheumatologist and professor at the University of Alabama-Birmingham, served as the lead Clinical Scientific Advisor on the development of the IVI-RA model. A number of other rheumatologists have provided feedback and assisted in development of the model and the IVI-RA Value Tool.
To ensure that simulated outcomes reflect outcomes in routine practice, baseline events rates (i.e., the rate of disease progression, the mortality rate, the rate at which patients discontinue treatment), patient preferences, and costs are modeled using real-world data. The term baseline event rate is frequently used to refer to the rate of particular events (or predicted outcomes) with a “ standard ” therapy or in the absence of treatment.
To enhance validity, relative treatment effects (e.g., relative risks, odds ratios, and hazard ratios) are, when possible, based on randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Relative treatment effects refer to relative differences in outcomes between treatments (in contrast, absolute treatment effects refer to absolute differences in outcomes between treatments). For example, if a treatment reduces the 20-year probability of mortality from 8% to 4%, then the absolute treatment effect is 8% – 4% = 4 percentage points, but the relative treatment effect (i.e., the relative risk) is 4% / 8% = 50%.
Having a patient-centered perspective is at the heart of what we do at IVI. Click here to learn about the role of patients in the IVI-RA model and the Open-Source Value Project more generally.
We aim to develop an IVI-RA model that captures all aspects of value important to the patient. Any feedback you can provide about our IVI-RA model will be considered in modifying the existing version of the model and ensuring that the model becomes even more patient-centered over time. To learn more and to share your perspective, click here.