ArticleMedical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran2016
The health systems' priority setting criteria for selecting health technologies: A systematic review of the current evidence.
Article in Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prioritizing the Potential Applications of Mobile-Health in the Iranian Health System.Journal of research in health sciences · 2020Pooled it
- The Cost Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Depression in Ethiopia: A Multiple Cohort Markov Model Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- The reimbursement process in three national healthcare systems: variation in time to reimbursement of pembrolizumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Review
- Equity, justice, and social values in priority setting: a qualitative study of resource allocation criteria for global donor organizations working in low-income countries.International journal for equity in health · 2022Review
- Which Criteria are Considered and How are They Evaluated in Health Technology Assessments? A Review of Methodological Guidelines Used in Western and Asian Countries.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Review
- Topic selection for health technology assessment: An approach combining multiple attribute decision making and decision rules.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Organizational aspect in healthcare decision-making: a literature review.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020Review
- Development of the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: an overview of systematic reviews of decision criteria for health decision-making.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2020Review
- The WHO-INTEGRATE evidence to decision framework version 1.0: integrating WHO norms and values and a complexity perspective.BMJ global health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the recent years, using health technologies to diagnose and treat diseases has had a considerable and accelerated growth. The proper use of these technologies may considerably help in the diagnosis and treatment of different diseases. On the other hand, unlimited and unrestricted entry of these technologies may result in induced demand by service providers. The aim of this study was to determine the appropriate criteria used in health technologies priority-setting models in the world.
methodsUsing MESH and free text, we sought and retrieved the relevant articles from the most appropriate medical databases (the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Scopus) through three separate search strategies up to March 2015. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) Studies with specific criteria; 2) Articles written in English; 3) Those articles conducted in compliance with priority setting of health technologies. Data were analyzed qualitatively using a thematic synthesis technique.
resultsAfter screening the retrieved papers via PRISMA framework, from the 7,012 papers, 40 studies were included in the final phase. Criteria for selecting health technologies (in pre assessment and in the assessment phase) were categorized into six main themes: 1) Health outcomes; 2) Disease and target population; 3) Technology alternatives; 4) Economic aspects; 5) Evidence; 6) and other factors. "Health effects/benefits" had the maximum frequency in health outcomes (8 studies); "disease severity" had the maximum frequency in disease and target population (12 studies); "the number of alternatives" had the maximum frequency in alternatives (2 studies); "cost-effectiveness" had the maximum frequency in economic aspects (15 studies); "quality of evidence" had the maximum frequency in evidence (4 studies); and "issues concerning the health system" had the maximum frequency in other factors (10 studies).
conclusionThe results revealed an increase in the number of studies on health technologies priority setting around the world, and emphasized the necessity of application of a multi- criteria approach for appropriate decision making about healthcare technologies in the health systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27390699PMC4898853W2285792068What 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.