SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2020
Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Software in Healthcare Priority Setting: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Applying reflective multicriteria decision analysis to understand the value of therapeutic alternatives in the management of gestational and peripartum anaemia in Spain.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Pooled it
- Using the Socio-Technical Allocation of Resources (STAR) approach to support chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management resource allocation in integrated care systems in England.Research in health services & regions · 2025Article
- Benefit-risk assessment of the use of toxic botanical drugs in superiority field: a case study onFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Assessing patient preferences for medical decision making - a comparison of different methods.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Knowledge Mapping of Multicriteria Decision Analysis in Healthcare: A Bibliometric Analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- The CAPACITI Decision-Support Tool for National Immunization Programs.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2021Article
- Priority setting in the Brazilian emergency medical service: a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA).BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Integrative Review of Managed Entry Agreements: Chances and Limitations.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objectives of this systematic review were to identify studies using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) software tools to support health prioritisation processes and describe the technical capabilities of the MCDA software tools identified.
methodsFirst, a systematic literature review was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, EconLit and Cochrane databases in July 2019 to identify studies that have used MCDA software for priority setting in health-related problems. Second, the MCDA software tools found in the review were downloaded (full versions, where freely available, and trial versions otherwise) and tested to extract their key technical characteristics.
resultsNine studies were included, from which seven different software tools, 1000minds
conclusionsThe use of MCDA software in prioritisation processes has a number of advantages such as inclusion of several types of stakeholders and the ability to analyse a greater number of alternatives and criteria and perform real-time sensitivity analyses. Proprietary software (i.e. software with licensing fees) seemed to have more features than freely available software. However, this field is still developing, with only a few studies where MCDA software was used to support health priority setting and opportunity costs not explicitly captured in many software tools.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31820294What 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.