scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for HTA Around the Globe: Exploring the Next Frontiers of HTA and Best Practices Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Unni Gopinathan ◽  
Trygve Ottersen ◽  
Pascale-Renée Cyr ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Justification ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Key Steps ◽  
Deliberative Processes

This comment reflects on an article by Oortwijn, Jansen, and Baltussen about the use and features of ‘evidence-informed deliberative processes’ (EDPs) among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world and the need for more guidance. First, we highlight procedural aspects that are relevant across key steps of EDP, focusing on conflict of interest, the different roles of stakeholders throughout a HTA and public justification of decisions. Second, we discuss new knowledge and models needed to maximize the value of deliberative processes at the expanding frontiers of HTA, paying special attention to when HTA is applied in primary care, employed for public health interventions, and is produced through international collaboration.

scholarly journals Evaluating Public Health Interventions: A Neglected Area in Health Technology Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jovana Stojanovic ◽  
Markus Wübbeler ◽  
Sebastian Geis ◽  
Eva Reviriego ◽  
Iñaki Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions

scholarly journals Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Appraisal Committee ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background: Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were recently introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes towards more legitimate decision-making. The EDP framework provides guidance that covers the HTA process, ie, contextual factors, installation of an appraisal committee, selecting health technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, and communication and appeal. The aims of this study were to identify the level of use of EDPs by HTA agencies, identify their needs for guidance, and to learn about best practices. Methods: A questionnaire for an online survey was developed based on the EDP framework, consisting of elements that reflect each part of the framework. The survey was sent to members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Two weeks following the invitation, a reminder was sent. The data collection took place between September-December 2018. Results: Contact persons from 27 member agencies filled out the survey (response rate: 54%), of which 25 completed all questions. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development and the critical elements regarding conducting and reporting on HTA are overall in place. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, appraisal, and communication and appeal. With regard to best practices, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) were most often mentioned. Conclusion: This is the first survey among HTA agencies regarding the use of EDPs and provides useful information for further developing a practical guide for HTA agencies around the globe. The results could support HTA agencies in improving their processes towards more legitimate decision-making, as they could serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation.

scholarly journals Developing a roadmap for Health Technology Assessment implementation in public health decisions

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Di Macio ◽  
M Caricato ◽  
C Primieri ◽  
C Favaretti ◽  
C De Waure
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Delphi Process ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Health Decisions

Abstract Issue Although the recognized importance of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in fostering health policy and management, little is known and differences emerge in the state of the art of HTA development and use in public health decisions. Description of the Problem HTA applied to public health interventions could lead to improved population's health, risk factor reduction and high quality services. All these factors represent the basis of health care system sustainability. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence about the application of HTA to public health. In this light, the Section on HTA of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA) is conducting a Delphi process in order to define a shared roadmap for the implementation of HTA in public health. Results A literature search was first performed on PubMed to identify useful documentation for drafting the roadmap. Taking clues from Kalò et al., who drafted an HTA roadmap scorecard to support HTA implementation in Central and Eastern Europe, a preliminary core set of actions and pillars to pave the way for the implementation of HTA in public health, was identified. Then, a group of HTA experts was invited to participate to the Delphi process with the aim to build consensus on the final set of actions and pillars to include in the roadmap. Lessons Evidence on the ways to strengthen the role of HTA in public health decisions is scant and the development of a shared roadmap could be useful to identify milestones to do it. Key messages HTA applied to public health could promote an efficient, sustainable, equitable and high-quality health system. Nevertheless, the role of HTA in taking public health decisions should be strengthened. As evidence on the application of HTA in public health is scant, the development of a shared roadmap could enhance fostering its use in taking decisions on public health interventions.

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENTIONS: A SYNTHESIS OF METHODOLOGICAL GUIDANCE

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Mathes ◽  
Sunya-Lee Antoine ◽  
Peggy Prengel ◽  
Stefanie Bühn ◽  
Stephanie Polus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Context Factors

Objectives: The evaluation of public health interventions poses some challenges. As a consequence, health technology assessment (HTA) methods for public health interventions (PHI) have to be adapted. This study aimed to summarize the available guidance on methods for HTA of PHI.Methods: We systematically searched for methodological guidance on HTA of PHIs. Our focus was on research synthesis methods to evaluate effectiveness. Relevant information was synthesized narratively in a standardized way.Results: Only four guidance documents were identified specifically for HTAs of PHI. The approaches used for HTAs of PHIs are broader and more flexible than those for medical interventions. For this reason, there is a tendency to identify the intervention components and context factors that influence the effectiveness and transferability of an intervention rather than to assess its effectiveness in general. The details in the guidance vary without justification. Unjustified heterogeneity between the different guidance approaches is most pronounced for quality assessment, assessment of applicability, and methods to integrate qualitative and quantitative evidence. Descriptions for the assessment of integrity, heterogeneity, sustainability, context factors, and applicability are often vague.Conclusions: The heterogeneity in approaches indicates that there is currently no consensus on methods to deal with the challenges of the PHI evaluations. A possible explanation for this may be that the methods are not sufficiently developed, and advantages and disadvantages of a certain method in relation to the research question (e.g., broad/focused) have not yet been sufficiently evaluated.

scholarly journals Principles for deliberative processes in health technology assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Bond ◽  
Rebecca Stiffell ◽  
Daniel A. Ollendorf
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
Large Group Discussion

Deliberative processes are a well-established part of health technology assessment (HTA) programs in a number of high- and middle-income countries, and serve to combine complex sets of evidence, perspectives, and values to support open, transparent, and accountable decision making. Nevertheless, there is little documentation and research to inform the development of effective and efficient deliberative processes, and to evaluate their quality. This article summarizes the 2020 HTAi Global Policy Forum (GPF) discussion on deliberative processes in HTA.Through a combination of small and large group discussion and successive rounds of polling, the GPF members reached strong agreement on three core principles for deliberative processes in HTA: transparency, inclusivity, and impartiality. In addition, discussions revealed other important principles, such as respect, reviewability, consistency, and reasonableness, that may supplement the core set. A number of associated supporting actions for each of the principles are also described in order to make each principle realizable in a given HTA setting. The relative importance of the principles and actions are context-sensitive and must be considered in light of the political, legislative, and operational factors that may influence the functioning of any particular HTA environment within which the deliberative process is situated. The paper ends with suggested concrete next steps that HTA agencies, researchers, and stakeholders might take to move the field forward. The proposed principles and actions, and the next steps, provide a springboard for further research and better documentation of important aspects of deliberation that have historically been infrequently studied.

scholarly journals Oncology Modeling for Fun and Profit! Key Steps for Busy Analysts in Health Technology Assessment

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn Beca ◽  
Don Husereau ◽  
Kelvin K. W. Chan ◽  
Neil Hawkins ◽  
Jeffrey S. Hoch
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Key Steps
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document