Recommendations in health technology assessments worldwide

Author:

Draborg Eva,Andersen Christian Kronborg

Abstract

Objectives:The objective of this study is to analyze statistically the possible determinants and implications of including or not including recommendations in health technology assessments (HTAs).Methods:A sample of 433 HTAs published by eleven leading institutions or agencies in nine countries was reviewed and analyzed statistically by multiple logistic regression.Results:The extent of policy and research recommendations in HTAs varies greatly from country to country. The content and scope of HTAs have some impact on recommendations. Extensive assessment of economic and organizational aspects increases the likelihood of including policy recommendations. Extensive assessment of technological and patient aspects increases the likelihood of including research recommendations, whereas extensive focus on economic aspects is negatively related to research recommendations. The most striking result is that the use of external partners for assessment increases the likelihood of including research recommendations in HTAs but not policy recommendations.Conclusions:HTA commissioners, agencies, institutions, and funding authorities need to be aware of the consequences of the choices they make in advance of assessing health technologies. Outsourcing HTA to external partners suggests a greater likelihood of being told that “more research is needed.” The scope and content of HTAs has an impact on the type of recommendations, and country-specific preferences are strong predictors of recommendations in HTAs.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy

Cited by 11 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Reporting Quality in Health Economic Evaluation Studies of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review;2024-01-25

2. Preferences of patients undergoing hemodialysis – results from a questionnaire-based study with 4,518 patients;Patient Preference and Adherence;2015-06

3. HTA in der Praxis;Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Deutsches, Europäisches und Internationales Medizinrecht, Gesundheitsrecht und Bioethik der Universitäten Heidelberg und Mannheim;2015

4. Transparenz und Rationalität: Der Gemeinsame Bundesausschuss, das Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen und die neue Institution zur Qualitätssicherung nach § 137 a SGB V;Die Gesellschaft und ihre Gesundheit;2011

5. Supporting the use of health technology assessments in policy making about health systems;International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care;2010-10

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