ArticleBMC health services research2010
Prioritisation criteria for the selection of new diagnostic technologies for evaluation.
Article in BMC health services research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selection and Prioritization of Medical Devices for HTA Evaluation: A Systematic Review of Existing Approaches.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Uptake of newer methodological developments and the deployment of meta-analysis in diagnostic test research: a systematic review.BMC medical research methodology · 2011Pooled it
- Criteria for designing integrated diagnosis interventions in low resource settings at the primary care level: a Delphi consensus study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Organizational aspect in healthcare decision-making: a literature review.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020Review
- Systematic review for the development of a pharmaceutical and medical products prioritization framework.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2019Article
- Diagnostic evidence cooperatives: bridging the valley of death in diagnostics development.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2018Article
- Common evidence gaps in point-of-care diagnostic test evaluation: a review of horizon scan reports.BMJ open · 2017Review
- Point-of-care testing in UK primary care: a survey to establish clinical needs.Family practice · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrently there is no framework for those involved in the identification, evaluation and prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies. Therefore we aimed to develop prioritisation criteria for the assessment of new diagnostic technologies, by gaining international consensus on not only which criteria should be used, but also their relative importance.
methodsA two-round Delphi process was used to generate consensus amongst an international panel of twenty-six experts on priority criteria for diagnostic health technology assessment. Participants represented a range of health care and related professions, including government, industry, health services and academia.
resultsBased on the responses to the first questionnaire 18 criteria were placed into three categories: high, intermediate and moderate priority. For 16 of the 18 criteria, agreement with the categorisation of the criteria into the high, intermediate and moderate categories was high at > or = 70% (10 had agreement > or = 80%). A further questionnaire and panel discussion reduced the criteria to 16 and two categories; seven were classified as high priority and nine intermediate.
conclusionsThis study proposes an objective structure of prioritisation criteria to use when assessing new diagnostic technologies, based on an expert consensus process. The value of these criteria is that no one single component should be used as the decisive driver for prioritisation of new diagnostic technologies for adoption in healthcare settings. Future studies should be directed at establishing the value of these prioritisation criteria across a range of healthcare settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.