ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2017
Ethics in HTA: Examining the "Need for Expansion".
Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expanding HTA - Correcting a Misattribution, Clarifying the Scope of HTA and CEA Comment on "Ethics in HTA: Examining the 'Need for Expansion'".International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness - A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study.International journal of health policy and management · 2019Article
- Can reflective multicriteria be the new paradigm for healthcare decision-making? The EVIDEM journey.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article by Daniels and colleagues on expanding the scope of health technology assessment (HTA) to embrace ethical analysis has received endorsement and criticism from commentators in this journal. Referring to this debate, we examine in this article the extent and locus of ethical analysis in HTA processes. An expansion/no-expansion framing of HTA is, in our view, not very fruitful. We argue that meaningfulness and relevance to the needs of the population are what should determine the extent of ethics in HTA. Once 'relevance' is the guiding principle, engaging in ethical analysis becomes inevitable as values are all over the place in HTA, also in how assessors frame research questions. We also challenge dividing the locus of ethical analysis into assessment and appraisal as this would detach HTA from its purpose, ie, supporting legitimate decision-making. Ethical analysis should therefore be considered integral to the HTA process.
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.