Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31409369›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2019

Assessing value in health care: using an interpretive classification system to understand existing practices based on a systematic review.

Brayan V Seixas, François Dionne, Tania Conte, Craig Mitton

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. The VBHC big picture: an umbrella review.BMC health services research · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Towards a New Understanding of Unmet Medical Need.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Brayan V SeixasDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, USA. brayanseixas@ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3863-0572
François DionnePrioritize Consulting, Vancouver, Canada.
Tania ConteCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver, Canada.
Craig MittonSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImplementing adequate strategies to assess the value of health services plays a central role in the effort to deal with the financial pressures faced by health care systems worldwide. This study aimed to understand which approaches to value assessment have been used in developed countries.

methodsWe conducted a rapid review and a gray literature search to identify value assessment frameworks. A two-stage screening process was utilized to identify existing approaches and cluster similar frameworks. In addition, we developed an interpretive classification system to make sense of existing approaches.

resultsOne thousand one hundred seventy-six references were identified and 38 papers were selected for full-review. Among these 38 articles, 22 distinct approaches to assess value of health care interventions were identified and classified according to four points: 1) use of single or multiple considerations to base value estimates; 2) use of disease-specific or generic criteria; 3) reliance on process-based or outcomes-based consideration; and 4) type of input and evidence considered.

conclusionsThe contextual nature of value assessment in health care becomes evident with the diversity of existing approaches. Despite the predominance of cases relying on the Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as the measure of value, this approach has not been sufficient to meet the needs of decision-makers. The use of multiple criteria has become more and more important, as well as the consideration of patient-reported measures. Considerations of costs are not always explicit and consistent.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision MakingDelivery of Health CareHealth ExpendituresHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'EfficiencyFrameworksResource allocationValue assessment

Identifiers

PMID31409369
PMCPMC6693163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.