ArticleThe patient2018
Putting Patients at the Centre of Healthcare: Progress and Challenges for Health Technology Assessments.
Article in The patient, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Value and Implementation of Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Health Technology Assessment for Japan: implications from systematic searches.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Pooled it
- Patient Preferences for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treatment: A Multi-method Approach Using Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling.The patient · 2025Article
- Global research on patient involvement in health technology assessment: a bibliometric analysis.Global health research and policy · 2025Article
- A genuine need or nice to have? Understanding HTA representatives' perspectives on the use of patient preference data.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- The three-domain impact framework for characterizing impact of patient involvement in health technology assessment.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- Development of a disease-specific health utility score for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from a discrete choice experiment patient preference study.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Article
- Using social media research in health technology assessment: stakeholder perspectives and scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Importance of Patient Involvement in the Value Assessment Process: On the Way Towards Personalised Treatments.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
- Potential Barriers of Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment in Central and Eastern European Countries.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Patients and public are important stakeholders in health technology assessment but the level of involvement is low - a call to action.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
- Can We Afford to Exclude Patients Throughout Health Technology Assessment?Frontiers in medical technology · 2021Article
- Use of Patient Preferences in Health Technology Assessment: Perspectives of Canadian, Belgian and German HTA Representatives.The patient · 2021Article
- Patient Preference Studies During Early Drug Development: Aligning Stakeholders to Ensure Development Plans Meet Patient Needs.Frontiers in medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health technology assessments (HTAs) are meant to inform health policy by taking account of all the potential impacts of using a health technology. In the 1990s, HTAs included rigorous research to produce patient-based evidence, and some supported participation of patient representatives to help focus HTA research and determine value. In the 2000s, HTAs became more closely linked to reimbursement decisions, focusing on clinical and cost effectiveness. Patient involvement should be tailored to the specific needs of each HTA. As the timeframe for HTAs has reduced, research to produce patient-based evidence has been replaced by input from patient groups. This places a burden on individuals and organizations that needs to be critically reviewed. Therefore, it is imperative that we clarify when patient involvement is likely to add value and support patients to provide their unique knowledge in the most optimal way to influence HTA decision making. To reduce the burden on patient groups, more must be done to encourage research to produce patient-based evidence early in technology development. Like clinical research, a programme of research should be carefully planned, with appropriate methodological rigor for each study, and all research should be published. For this, the development of quality standards for research to produce patient-based evidence may be needed. Patient involvement has inherent value. It should be focused, systematic and transparent, and evolve according to the experiences of all stakeholders. All countries or collaboratives that undertake HTA should consider how they can elicit the needs, preferences and experiences of patients to support creation of patient-centered healthcare policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30051315What 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.