Understanding the Normativity of Health Technology Assessment: Ontological, Moral, and Epistemological Commitments
-
Published:2024-06-17
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1065-3058
-
Container-title:Health Care Analysis
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Health Care Anal
Author:
Bloemen BartORCID, Oortwijn Wija, van der Wilt Gert Jan
Abstract
AbstractThe inherent normativity of HTA can be conceptualized as a result of normative commitments, a concept that we further specify to encompass moral, epistemological and ontological commitments at play in the practice of HTA. Based on examples from literature, and an analysis of the example of assessing Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT), we will show that inevitable normative decisions in conducting an assessment commits the HTA practitioner to moral (regarding what makes a health technology desirable), ontological (regarding which effects of health technology are conceivable), and epistemological (regarding how to obtain reliable information about health technology) norms. This highlights and supports the need for integrating normative analysis and stakeholder participation, providing guidance to HTA practitioners when making normative choices. This will foster a shared understanding between those who conduct, use, or are impacted by assessments regarding what are conceivable and desirable outcomes of using health technology, and how to collect reliable information to assess whether these outcomes are (going to be) realized. It also provides more insight into the implications of different normative choices.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference53 articles.
1. O’Rourke, B., Oortwijn, W., Schuller, T., International, J., & Task, G. (2020). The new definition of health technology assessment: A milestone in international collaboration. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 36(3), 187–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462320000215. 2. Hofmann, B., Bond, K., & Sandman, L. (2018). Evaluating facts and facting evaluations: On the fact-value relationship in HTA. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 24, 957–965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12920. 3. Legault, G. A., Suzanne, K., Bellemare, C. A., Béland, J. P., Bernier, L., Dagenais, P., Daniel, C. É., Gagnon, H., Parent, M., & Patenaude, J. (2018). Revisiting the Fact/Value dichotomy: A Speech Act Approach to improve the Integration of Ethics in Health Technology Assessment. Open Journal of Philosophy, 8(5), 578–593. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2018.85042. 4. Charlton, V., DiStefano, M., Mitchell, P., Morrell, L., Rand, L., Badano, G., Baker, R., Calnan, M., Chalkidou, K., Culyer, A., Howdon, D., Hughes, D., Lomas, J., Max, C., McCabe, C., O’Mahony, J. F., Paulden, M., Pemberton-Whiteley, Z., Rid, A., & Wester, G. (2023). We need to talk about values: A proposed framework for the articulation of normative reasoning in health technology assessment. Health Economics Policy and Law, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133123000038. 5. Gagnon, H., Legault, G. A., Bellemare, C. A., Parent, M., Dagenais, P., Tapin, S. K. B., Bernier, D., Beland, L., Daniel, J. P., C. E., & Patenaude, J. (2020). How does HTA addresses current social expectations? An international survey. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 37, e9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462320000793.
|
|