Transparency in practice: Evidence from ‘verification analyses’ issued by the Polish Agency for Health Technology Assessment in 2012–2015

Author:

Ozierański Piotr,Löblová Olga,Nicholls Natalia,Csanádi Marcell,Kaló Zoltán,McKee Martin,King Lawrence

Abstract

AbstractTransparency is recognised to be a key underpinning of the work of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, yet it has only recently become a subject of systematic inquiry. We contribute to this research field by considering the Polish Agency for Health Technology Assessment (AHTAPol). We situate the AHTAPol in a broader context by comparing it with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England. To this end, we analyse all 332 assessment reports, called verification analyses, that the AHTAPol issued from 2012 to 2015, and a stratified sample of 22 Evidence Review Group reports published by NICE in the same period. Overall, by increasingly presenting its key conclusions in assessment reports, the AHTAPol has reached the transparency standards set out by NICE in transparency of HTA outputs. The AHTAPol is more transparent than NICE in certain aspects of the HTA process, such as providing rationales for redacting assessment reports and providing summaries of expert opinions. Nevertheless, it is less transparent in other areas of the HTA process, such as including information on expert conflicts of interest. Our findings have important implications for understanding HTA in Poland and more broadly. We use them to formulate recommendations for policymakers.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy

Reference48 articles.

1. Three worlds of health technology assessment: explaining patterns of diffusion of HTA agencies in Europe

2. European Union network for Health Technology Assessment (2017), ‘Mission, vision & values’. EUnetHTA, http://www.eunethta.eu/about-us/mission-vision-values [15 January 2017].

3. The politics of health technology assessment in Poland

4. Plisko R. (n.d.), ‘Ograniczenia QALY w ocenie technologii stosowanych w stanach terminalnych’. HTA Consulting.

5. Strategic Institutional Design: Two Case Studies of Non-Majoritarian Agencies in Health Care Priority-Setting

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3